Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Proof of stake is incapable of producing a consensus

yanmaani.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 822 posts

Re: Proof of stake is incapable of producing a consensus

#211

Post by cinquemb »

inter_netuser wrote: post #200
cinquemb wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can fork decentralized over (crypto) collateralized stablecoins even if you can't force a fork of a centralized stablecoin operated by incorporated entity to be recognized by them. Unless we're going to pretend that there is only one way on and off networks and only in one currency denomination…

how do I send a wire to DAI?

Just because you may not be willing to swap cash/gold/anything a local counter party values in whatever jurisdiction you reside in for a random networks gas and/or tokens that trade on them, doesn't mean others cannot.

If you want to use coinbase to buy crypto and tokens, that's on you.

Re: Proof of stake is incapable of producing a consensus

#212

Post by JumpCrisscross »

inter_netuser wrote: post #176
eftychis wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And Proof of Work is better because the haves buy equipment the have-nots can't buy to vote? Unless you have a citizenship based voting of some short where a single person gets a single vote and they actually vote (automatically I guess and assuming without delegating to the big whale because "I am bored") what do you think agreement via resource scarcity implies? P.S. Also lobbying...

This is a common misunderstanding. Proof of Work does not get you any votes at all. PoW is a service to the network, to create an immutable ledger. It comes with a very real nuclear option that will bankrupt miners if you misbehave and get fired by hashing algo change. It's just a boring industrial business, like smelting aluminum or iron.

> Proof of Work does not get you any votes at all

Within protocol, no. But when weighing a fork, those with the gold choose the rules.

Re: Proof of stake is incapable of producing a consensus

#214

Post by inter_netuser »

mission_failed wrote: post #206
inter_netuser wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a common misunderstanding. Proof of Work does not get you any votes at all. PoW is a service to the network, to create an immutable ledger. It comes with a very real nuclear option that will bankrupt miners if you misbehave and get fired by hashing algo change. It's just a boring industrial business, like smelting aluminum or iron.

Smelting metals actually produces something, proof of work just burns electricity for the random chance of winning a lottery

Simply because something is intangible and invisible, like atoms, does not make it any less valuable.

It's a system with an immutable monetary policy. Literally unprecedented in human history.

Re: Proof of stake is incapable of producing a consensus

#215

Post by vegai_ »

pshc wrote: post #34

Is this FUD from Bitcoin maximalists? > That key is valid to sign any number of versions of, let’s say, block #200, and there is no objective, system-internal standard for which version is legitimate, other than “the one that was published first”. The real block #200 will have hundreds of attestations courtesy of randomly-selected validators, each of those signatures attesting to its validity and finality.

There's so much money in crypto that it's a bit difficult to believe anything people write about it.

Re: Proof of stake is incapable of producing a consensus

#216

Post by brabel »

hopevillian wrote: post #142
TheDong wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a difference between each of those uses of electricity and PoW. PoW is throwing away electricity for the sake of it, and resists getting more efficient. If the goal is for the bitcoin network to cost $1M to do a single double spend, then PoW has to use $1M worth of electricity every 10 minutes. Let's say we live in a future where we suddenly have 10x as much electricity. Due to supply and demand, electricity…

bitcoin incentivizes the search for cheaper energy, and allows for the instant monetization of once wasted energy. That's a LOT. this whole argument of energy use... i bet most of these people would have fallen for the same energy propaganda when the internet was just getting started... "what's email?? why would you waste electricity to send an electronic mail??"

You haven't addressed the parent commenter's point though: that PoW will cause increase of energy consumption every time you make any progress in making energy cheaper, hence cancelling out any improvements energy production efficiency.

It would only be benefitial if after a certain level of efficiency were achieved, PoW got banned and all that efficiency increase could actually benefit consumers of energy that did not have to keep increasing spend to keep up (though even that's not sure, because if energy becomes 10x cheaper, it's just a matter of time for people to invent new creative ways to use all that cheap energy that's prohebitevely expensive right now).

Re: Proof of stake is incapable of producing a consensus

#217

Post by inter_netuser »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #212
inter_netuser wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a common misunderstanding. Proof of Work does not get you any votes at all. PoW is a service to the network, to create an immutable ledger. It comes with a very real nuclear option that will bankrupt miners if you misbehave and get fired by hashing algo change. It's just a boring industrial business, like smelting aluminum or iron.

> Proof of Work does not get you any votes at all Within protocol, no. But when weighing a fork, those with the gold choose the rules.

forkwars have shown in practise this isn't the case.

Status quo will be incredibly difficult to overcome for attackrs, even with a large chunk of industry, exchanges, miners and whales against the status quo, it prevailed.

Re: Proof of stake is incapable of producing a consensus

#219

Post by tromp »

inter_netuser wrote: post #176
eftychis wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And Proof of Work is better because the haves buy equipment the have-nots can't buy to vote? Unless you have a citizenship based voting of some short where a single person gets a single vote and they actually vote (automatically I guess and assuming without delegating to the big whale because "I am bored") what do you think agreement via resource scarcity implies? P.S. Also lobbying...

This is a common misunderstanding. Proof of Work does not get you any votes at all. PoW is a service to the network, to create an immutable ledger. It comes with a very real nuclear option that will bankrupt miners if you misbehave and get fired by hashing algo change. It's just a boring industrial business, like smelting aluminum or iron.

> hashing algo

You mean Proof of Work algorithm. Which is not quite the same as hashing function [1].

[1] https://cryptorials.io/beyond-hashcash-proof-work-theres-min...

Re: Proof of stake is incapable of producing a consensus

#220

Post by darawk »

inter_netuser wrote: post #195
darawk wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you didn't read the article to the end, did you? I skimmed it. It made no serious arguments. If it had a serious argument, it would have exploited one of the many existing proof of stake systems. > Security model in PoS = trust the rich. Some like having masters, whatever floats your boat. You mean...exactly like PoW mining?

No, exactly the opposite of PoW mining. Miners do not set the rules, they are merely a service that provides immutability to a ledger, with a nuclear option that will bankrupt all the billions they have invested, should they misbehave. Large stakers can rent-seek and extract your wealth, PoS is the same system we have now, plus some code. You are quite literally being exploited right this minute, by the same methods…

> Miners do not set the rules, they are merely a service that provides immutability to a ledger, with a nuclear option that will bankrupt all the billions they have invested, should they misbehave.

Stakers do not set the rules any more than do large mining pools.

> Large stakers can rent-seek and extract your wealth, PoS is the same system we have now, plus some code.

You know MEV is a thing in PoW too, right?

Post reply on HN