PoS vs PoW tweetstorm that digs into the fundamentals. Great overview of the argument:https://twitter.com/hugohanoi/status/951762596255838209 …
-
-
Ehh yes but most of these joules are turned into heat in mining farms. How is this efficient?
-
Like I said, the mining hardware can be inefficient, and there’s room for improvement there (faster, generate less heat etc.). But the hashing operations themselves are 100% efficient for the purpose of protecting the ledger from being rewritten. One hash in, one hash out.
-
No: energy goes in, hashes are produced, security is the result. However, security can be achieved without those hashes, for example by PoS.
-
Its like u want not to understand
-
Well, enlighten me.. . Proof of stake protects the ledger from being rewritten with a fraction of the energy cost. That is what I call efficient.
-
It doesn't protect it as PoW, not as safe, period.
-
I would be more than happy to learn why PoS is less secure, but I don't see why. PoW gives security because it is expensive to generate a high fraction of the total hash rate, whereas PoS gives security because it is expensive to have a large fraction of the coin supply.
-
please read the tweets from Hugo from 1/.. if your case is on efficiency, PoW will be more efficient in the near future, all those heat will be reinvested into more energy using a patented technology.
- 1 more reply
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.
