9/ You cannot gain something without giving up something equivalent. This is the absolute law that governs our universe.
-
-
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.
-
FWIW, Satoshi couldn't foresee how much mining would centralize (the "one CPU, one vote" dream). It's possible that *nothing is safe from centralization forces*.
-
Maybe the best we could do as a community, is to keep the barrier-to-entry as low as possible for mining. And hope that a competitive industry will keep centralization forces in check.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
One last time: the "equivalent amount of hashpower" argument is true. NO ONE DISPUTES THAT. The point is that this is just one small part of "security."
-
Sure, it is not the only part, as I pointed out:https://twitter.com/hugohanoi/status/952418125508575233 …
-
but not sure about "just a small part".
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Ari getting Owned
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
To my reading, all you've really proven is that PoW can't have identical properties to PoS. That is true. It's also true that Vitalik might be minimizing the potential disruptiveness of addressing a Casper 51%. Doesn't mean it can't or won't work in the real world tho, imo
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.
