"As PoS merely involves the temporary lockup of existing capital and does not consume said capital, it does not satisfy the unforgeable costliness requirement" - @hugohanoi
Excellent post!https://medium.com/@hugonguyen/work-is-timeless-stake-is-not-554c4450ce18 …
-
-
> Not in the grand scheme Can you elaborate? You still have not given any reasons to back up your argument that hardware dispersion is ineffective against the state.
-
Can illustrate. Saudi Arabia just killed a journalist at their embassy. What was US response? Again the scope is false but question is then in which scenarios would state seize hardware (under what pretext). Some would lead countries to cooperate others would not. Lex Pirate Bay.
-
(Never said dispersion is ineffective—i.e. censorship resistant—I am saying that dispersion logics contradict the scale logic on which your overarching claim is made. If we take dispersion as positive then something in your argument is absurd logically speaking).
-
((Sorry irresistant—too many negations.))
-
Obviously degree of decentralization matters, i.e., dispersion over 200 countries is better than 2. But you're missing the point. Point is PoW has this defensive option *at all*, due to physical HW on the ground. Disperse hardware is the last line of defense if pools are hacked.
-
In comparison, PoS validators are merely software & required to have sensitive keys online to sign txs. Validators can be targeted from anywhere remotely. Once keys are stolen & majority control lost (btw the threshold for majority control in PoS is 1/3, not 1/2), you’re screwed.
-
The other & even bigger issue, is this https://twitter.com/hugohanoi/status/1050924130487291904 … PoW: w/ majority control, still needs to spend a ridic amount of money to rewrite history/double-spend. PoS: majority control means doing these things at almost *no cost*. Overall, risks nowhere near comparable.
-
It is hard to miss a point that is overstated. Easier the other way around—if dispersion is mission critical design accordingly. I am not arguing the obvious just your reasoning—by implication hw+energy is not alchemy, there are other costs in play. You see this yet you don’t
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
You could make it instead of referencing me to an abstract point that is only clear to you.
Thanks. 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.

- and no you still have not addressed my 2nd point. Not sure what you mean by ineffective. Hard for Chinese govt to seize hardware in China AND Iceland. That’s what I mean by geographically decentralized.