4 ms·
> BTCs "final" is just to wait some blocks its never final its just becomes incredibly unlikely to change the longer you wait. This is objectively worse than ha
by atweiden 5y ago
> BTCs "final" is just to wait some blocks its never final its just becomes incredibly unlikely to change the longer you wait. This is objectively worse than having a final state and on top of that it requires the history rather than just the last final state.
You can have that type of finality with centralized protocols built on top of the Bitcoin blockchain — Lightning Network being the standout example.
N.B. this issue is nuanced in PoS due to the complete absence of a quantitative fork ranking protocol. The PoW blockchains pow1, pow2, pow3 can be algorithmically ranked according to cumulative hash difficulty unfakeable sans external input (electricity). High difficulty == high certainty. Conversely, the PoS blockchains pos1, pos2, pos3, cannot be compared sans external information/trust. All theoretical finality in PoS is based on trust in central authorities — this type of “finality” is similar to the finality you have in a particular OSS project’s Git history, insofar as the history is dictated by trusted authorities in all cases.
As many commentators have quipped historically, you can build centralized systems on top of decentralized ones, but the reverse isn’t true.
- noxer 5y ago>You can have that type of finality with centralized protocols built on top of the Bitcoin blockchain — Lightning Network being the standout example. Whats the point? No one wants that beside that LN needs BTC on chain Tx which if you dont arbitrary define as final after some blocks makes it exactly the same - not final. PoS/PoW is rather irrelevant. we already have solutions to make blocks/ledgers final its doesn't need PoW or PoS its just a properties that BTC doesn't have because it was designed without. There is no fundamental reason why it cant have it.
- atweiden 5y agoI don’t quite catch your point. The chances your brain continues functioning over the next twelve minutes is not 100%, but 100% less some infinitesimally small fraction. 99.999999...% is as close physical reality ever comes to 100%. > PoS/PoW is rather irrelevant It’s an incredibly relevant fact that PoS blockchains pos1, pos2, pos3 cannot be compared without overtly trusting central authorities to give you the “correct” answer. Conversely, the PoW blockchains pow1, pow2, and pow3 can be objectively ranked by cumulative hashrate using simple mathematical comparisons. Contrary to popular belief — and despite the endless handwaiving PoS acolytes engage in over social media — PoS blockchains continue to lack a meaningful answer to this predicament which doesn’t boil down to overtly trusting central authorities. Which begs the question: why do they need a blockchain at all?
- tsimionescu 5y agoAll block chains in practice require trusting central authorities (trust the code, trust the protocol, trust the math behind it, trust the hardware, trust people to honor their off-chain transactions, trust authorities to help when they don't etc.) so this whole fantasy about 'trustless systems' is meaningless anyway. You can't create trustless electronic systems for humans. There is simply too much complexity in even the simplest hardware and software for any single person to be able to understand without trusting others. And this doesn't just apply to the 'unwashed masses', but to every single CS researcher, OS programmer or Linus Torvalds.
- Dzugaru 5y agoThis is blatantly false. Bitcoin doesn't require anything at all besides the idea of a most work chain humanity produced. You just pick it and that's it. You cant pick wrong, there is no chain bigger. All other cryptos are a fantasy and cannot provide any comparable guarantees.
- noxer 5y ago>You cant pick wrong, there is no chain bigger. It happened multiple times that a longer change was discoed shortly after. So in reality you have to wait some blocks to reduce the risk of a longer chain to almost zero. Also the trust you missed is that you have to TRUST that at least 50% of the work is produces and controlled (pool owner) by honest humans, because if not they could collude and re-org/double-spend. which essentially means you will pick the wrong chain because they make you think its the longest while secretly mining a longer chain that will eventually repalce the once you picked. There is absolutely no way you would know before its to late so you blindly trust that from an unknown number of people the majority is honest. If you take mining pools into account you trust a hand full of people who control them. >All other cryptos are a fantasy and cannot provide any comparable guarantees. Obvious nonsense, other tech has defined finality. Not pick the longest and if a longer shows up later you switch. These systems provide MORE guarantees.
- tsimionescu 5y ago