3 ms·
ETH wont, and shouldn't migrate to PoS. PoS is a scam -- a trick, a reinvention of existing corrupt economic models. It throws out the greatest part of decentra
by rfd4sgmk8u 5y ago
ETH wont, and shouldn't migrate to PoS. PoS is a scam -- a trick, a reinvention of existing corrupt economic models.
It throws out the greatest part of decentralized cryptocurrencies -- trustless, independently verifiable, auto-adjusting to external conditions, hard to fake proof of work. It replaces it with shell games and chicanery.
I am very pro proof of work. The energy usage is a good thing. We can deal with the emissions from generation out of band, it is not the protocols problem.
Two primary concerns, technical feasibility and political strife:
I have my extreme doubts that you can move a chain like this without causing it to collapse. As yet all we have seen out of the eth camp is more broken proof of concepts -- not a viable model for a potentially trillion dollar economy. How to you replace a jet engine mid flight? (You don't. Unless you like not safely landing).
PoS coin is worthless coin. If you want to have your expensive-to-mine gas coin be worth something, you have to make it hard to acquire. My second concern is that if they do manage to 'migrate', enough folks will ignore this and keep mining. This is a problem today with more contentious PoW hard forks.
Ultimately this behavior will lead to more chain forks, which unlike in the ETC days actually is a big deal today. Whos USDT USDC etc is the real coin? The eth1 PoW 'legacy' network, or the eth2 'pos' chain, or what about the eth1-a/eth1-b fork when the first political staking challenges come up (see all world religion schisms).
PoW solves this problem. One truth, enforced by universal energy usage. Not power players arguing over interpretations of religious text.
- hoka-one-one 5y agorothschilds
- r32rf43g 5y agoWhat are your thoughts on PoET systems?
- rfd4sgmk8u 5y agoProof of elapsed time? The intel thing? Only works with trusted nodes and/or permissioned blockchains; not suitable for trustless/permissionless public chains. The only trustless consensus system we have today is proof of work. And it works well, at scale, for 14 years.
- exo762 5y ago> enough folks will ignore this and keep mining Irrelevant. Well designed networks are pretty much isolated from whims of miners. Ethereum is one of them, Bitcoin is not. I'm speaking about 2 weeks difficulty re-targeting window vs single block window. > It replaces it with shell games and chicanery. Why do you perceive it like that? I would love to hear details. Ethereum will use hybrid PoS. Where random number generation (deciding who will become next block producer) is separated from deciding who is in the pool of potential producers (anty-sybil defense). First will be decided with commit-reveal scheme unbiased with the use of VDFs, second - with PoS.
- rfd4sgmk8u 5y agoSounds like a shell game to me. You know what isn't? Burning energy, using a simple hash function to measure how much energy was burned. Simple, effective, safe. Energy usage is a good thing, actually.
- exo762 5y agoThere is nothing simple about hash functions :-) They rely on unproven mathematical conjecture that one-way functions exist. Their existence would imply that P!=NP :-) Re: shell game. Are you implying that fraud or misdirection is involved? Some bitcoin scientist should be able to point where it is hidden. Or is it just a claim without evidence?