4/ Where pure-CS-type PoS people fail is a complete disregard for (a) economics (b) history & (c) physics. The same way people chased Perpetual Motion completely disregarded (a) (b) & (c), although they had a better excuse since they didn't possess the right conceptual tools.
-
Show this thread
-
5/ If an object has value, people *will* spend effort to chase it, up to whatever the object is worth. MC=MR, in other words. PoS won’t save you from PoW’s “waste”, cost just manifests in a different way. “Nothing is cheaper than PoW”. h/t
@Truthcoin http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-cheapest/ …2 replies 6 retweets 54 likesShow this thread -
6/ PoW is what gives Bitcoin “unforgeable costliness”, something few CS people would even try to analyze.
@NickSzabo4 spent years researching & elaborately explained in his study on the Origin of Money: (Good) money *must* have unforgeable costliness. https://nakamotoinstitute.org/shelling-out/3 replies 13 retweets 59 likesShow this thread -
7/ PoW is a lot more than Sybil-control, it gives digital blocks real-world weight, the same way Gold has real weight. What are blocks but simply a bunch of 1s & 0s? PoW is the _bridge_ between the digital & the physical.https://bitcointechtalk.com/the-anatomy-of-proof-of-work-98c85b6f6667 …
2 replies 9 retweets 60 likesShow this thread -
8/ Value doesn’t come from nothing, it doesn’t arise just because a bunch of people collectively decide that some digital strings have value via their computer nodes - which is what Proof-of-Stake does.
3 replies 2 retweets 32 likesShow this thread -
9/ Like many astutely observed, if it was possible to create money this way (by hooking up a bunch of computers together), we wouldn’t have to wait until now. Make no mistake, PoW mining & Nakamoto consensus are crucial in the creation of digital hard money.
3 replies 3 retweets 28 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @hugohanoi
We have fiat money, and tradeable rewards points and airline miles. There are thousands of examples (even excluding fiat money). Bitcoin is very different from these, with many advantages, but it's incorrect to say that evidence suggests you need unforgeable costliness.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AriDavidPaul
I fell it was obvious so didn’t add a qualifier but unforgeable costliness is a mandatory requirement only for hard-to-manipulate sound money. You can of cos do whatever you want with make-believe unsound money: fiat, reward points, travel miles, etc.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @hugohanoi
Isn’t it the opposite? If funny money can so easily gain real value, doesn’t that suggest unforgeable costliness isn’t necessary for something less funny?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AriDavidPaul
Having a price tag doesn’t construe “real” value. Anything can have a price tag above its true value due to people being irrational or threat of violence. But in the long run things always return to their true value.
2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes
The “sound” part of sound money gives the monetary asset an anchor of value to return to. Funny money has no anchor.
-
-
Replying to @hugohanoi @AriDavidPaul
But also individual people don't exist for the long run.
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
