4/ There’s something very similar to PoS in the history of technology, it’s called the idea of a Perpetual Motion Machine.
-
-
1/ You're stating an assumption as though it's fact. Try this thought experiment: would it be possible to devise a PoW cryptocurrency that is *less* efficient than Bitcoin? Consider how the energy -> security dynamic changes based on miner centralization,
-
It's not an assumption, it's math.https://twitter.com/hugohanoi/status/952289179387310080 …
-
Over a large distribution, the amount of hash power required to rewrite X blocks is *exactly the same as what was required to mine those X blocks in the first place*. That's a fact and what I meant by PoW having 100% efficiency in terms of protecting the ledger against rewrite.
-
No one disputed that. You're fixating on one tiny part of the security system. A key question is based on the structure, does the system naturally gravitate towards one in which there's a monopoly or oligopoly on hash power, and what incentives does that create?
-
That's a completely orthogonal issue. Whether a PoW ledger was written by a single powerful miner, or by a diverse group of miners: that still does *not* negate the fact that to attack that ledger you need to spend an equivalent amount of hash power that was expensed.
-
Now that doesn't mean that mining centralization is not an issue, and the nature of the PoW hashing algo *might* have some impact on the degree of centralization. But what doesn't have centralization tendencies?
-
If you know some alternatives to PoW mining that doesn't gravitate towards centralization, I'm all ears.
-
And surely, whatever that solution would be, it's *not* PoS.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
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.
