3 ms·
> Don't forget that do not have enough to stake can pool their resources together. That's great! And makes a lot of sense. However, it still requires locking c
by beaner 6y ago
> Don't forget that do not have enough to stake can pool their resources together.
That's great! And makes a lot of sense. However, it still requires locking capital. Those who do not have a lot of money, spend a much higher percentage of their money, and therefore need it to be liquid. So though pooling may reduce the effect of inflationary rich-poor inequality increases, I don't think it would eliminate it.
- rglullis 6y ago> I don't think it would eliminate it. Well, duh. No system will ever be perfect and there will always be costs associated with BFT systems. The question is knowing how these systems compare with one another and what kind of trade-offs are there. It is impossible to dispute that the costs of keeping a PoS-based system is overall lower than the current state-of-the-art, yet you try to knock PoS while ignoring all the analog issues with PoW? Your cognitive dissonance is showing.
- beaner 6y agoI'd like to continue engaging in good-faith conversation, not start exchanging barbs with undertones of acrimony.