3 ms·
You always create heat but at different efficiency levels. If you create enough heat with your miner to keep your siberian home warm it’s fair to say you’re not
by keymone 8y ago
You always create heat but at different efficiency levels. If you create enough heat with your miner to keep your siberian home warm it’s fair to say you’re not being very efficient at computing.
I don’t know if a single system where mutually untrusting parties can find consensus in distributed ledger other than PoW or it’s energy (but not complexity) equivalent PoS. If you do - make a money out of it and be a trillionaire, nobody is stopping you.
So far the only thing that probably works is PoW.
- EGreg 8y agoTell me again what’s wrong with Ripple or Stellar? How are they centralized?
- topmonk 8y agoRipple and Stellar are completely centralized. It's simply a web of trust. If one of your peers that have given you “trust”, such as a bank in which you have an account, decides they want to freeze your funds and prevent you from spending your money on the Ripple network, they can do so. With Bitcoin, this can't be done.
- EGreg 8y agoThat’s totally false though. Only if the majority of your peers colludes, then you don’t make progress, but then you just change your peers and make progress.
- topmonk 8y agoI haven't looked at ripple in awhile, but I thought the idea was that if Alice agrees that she can float Bob $5 and Bob agrees that he can float Charles $5 then as long as you trust Alice with a $5 debt, you can trust Charles with a $5 debt, even though you don't know Charles. And in practice it's usually that Alice and Bob are banks, and Charles is just a customer of Bob's bank. So, Bob can freeze Charles' money. What you're talking about sounds more like EOS, Cardano, Ethereum Proof of Stake, etc.
- EGreg 8y agoI think you are thinking of RipplePay, which was like 10 years ago. Since then Ripple introduced the XRP distributed ledger which is what we’re talking about
- keymone 8y agoSo rather than addressing my points you start the cycle again by suggesting implementations of PoS coins? What’s wrong with Ripple and Stellar is that they are PoS coins. PoS doesn’t address any existing issues but adds layers of complexity. And both are centralized pre-mine scams anyway.
- topmonk 8y agoYou made a pretty bold statement saying that no Proof of Stake systems are not immune to grinding, although they're are some currently major ones in existence, EOS, Carsano, etc. If you can grind away at these systems, why don't you do that and make a trillion dollars yourself?
- keymone 8y agoJust because something can be attacked doesn’t mean it can be attacked cheaply. Besides, your argument cuts both ways - if you think PoS are so much better and PoW will eventually be worthless, show me how much BTC you shorted today or ever. I bet it’s zero.
- topmonk 8y agoI think PoS is much more environmentally friendly than PoW. That's not the same as whether I think either will increase or decline in the short term, which is a different question entirely. Anyway, you have yet to prove the core of your argument, that any current PoS system can be defeated by an equivalent amount of work as a PoW system through grinding. Again, this is a bold statement. Can you at least begin to try to defend it?
- keymone 8y agoFirst, talking of environmental impact of PoW is misguided. It’s producers of energy that do harm, not consumers. Second, stake grinding is an attack. You’re the one who has to prove your PoS system is not affected by it. As far as I’m concerned cost of attack is the same as in PoW except PoS shifts costs into political spectrum via totally redundant layer of complexity.