32/PoS plans to rely on “making it the user's responsibility to authenticate the latest state out of band. They can do this by asking their friends, block explorers, businesses that they interact with, etc. for a recent block hash in the chain that they see as the canonical one.”
-
Show this thread
-
33/ Vitalik’s beloved defense against this type of weakness is that PoW also require social consensus. Well, DUH. *All man-made systems require some degree of social consensus*, there is no exception.
2 replies 5 retweets 57 likesShow this thread -
34/ The political system, the transportation system, the banking system, the dollar, Bitcoin, etc. All these systems require buy-in from humans collectively as a group, in order for them to work. Man-made systems would break down immediately without social consensus.
2 replies 8 retweets 61 likesShow this thread -
35/ To argue that since PoW needs social consensus, it’s OK for PoS to need social consensus, is a downright stupid argument. What matters is not whether you need social consensus, but *how much*?
1 reply 9 retweets 71 likesShow this thread -
36/ The less social consensus / human intervention a system needs, the stronger & more secure it is. The goal is to move as much as possible to *machine consensus*- to eliminate human biases & errors.
3 replies 20 retweets 104 likesShow this thread -
37/ PoW makes machine-level consensus a trivial problem. When there is a fork, a machine just has to pick the one with the most accumulated PoW. Yes, Bitcoin still needs some social consensus to get the system up & running. But after that, it’s mostly on auto-pilot.
1 reply 7 retweets 63 likesShow this thread -
38/ In contrast, in PoS you would continuously need social consensus in order to resolve forks. The reliance on social consensus is magnitudes bigger than PoW.
3 replies 9 retweets 60 likesShow this thread -
39/ In conclusion, there is just no comparison between PoW & PoS. It’s like a NBA team vs a highschool team.
6 replies 7 retweets 73 likesShow this thread -
40/ PoW is a system designed to withstand the worst, PoS involves obfuscated setups in order to hide its fatal weaknesses. One is a resilient platform for the future, the other is a toy.
19 replies 18 retweets 129 likesShow this thread -
Hugo Nguyen Retweeted Hugo Nguyen
Hugo Nguyen added,
Hugo Nguyen @hugohanoiReplying to @TuurDemeesterThanks Tuur. To add since so many people seem to be missing the point... “What about tech innovations? Cars vs horses? LED vs. lightbulb? Aren’t those examples of using less energy to achieve the same goal?” No because in those cases there are exploitable inefficiencies.17 replies 7 retweets 41 likesShow this thread
Hugo Nguyen Retweeted Hugo Nguyen
42/ Continued debate with Vitalikhttps://twitter.com/hugohanoi/status/952712190808608768 …
Hugo Nguyen added,
-
-
Hugo Nguyen Retweeted Hugo Nguyen
Hugo Nguyen added,
1 reply 0 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
Hugo Nguyen Retweeted Hugo Nguyen
44/ A deep dive into PoW & extending the energy argumenthttps://twitter.com/hugohanoi/status/957091071745433601 …
Hugo Nguyen added,
0 replies 1 retweet 5 likesShow this thread
End of conversation
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.
