4 ms·

PoH is essentially just PoW: more blocks mean more time has spent. I don't know why they just named it something different. Since SOL is not really decentralize

by a1371 5y ago

PoH is essentially just PoW: more blocks mean more time has spent. I don't know why they just named it something different. Since SOL is not really decentralized, the validators can communicate a lot faster. So that's the difference with a usual blockchain where the latency is higher.

mattdesl 5y ago
It appears quite different than PoW, which is how it is able to boast so much higher throughput. https://tokens-economy.gitbook.io/consensus/chain-based-proof-of-capacity-space/proof-of-history https://tokens-economy.gitbook.io/consensus/chain-based-proo... https://medium.com/solana-labs/proof-of-history-explained-by-a-water-clock-e682183417b8 https://medium.com/solana-labs/proof-of-history-explained-by... I agree it doesn’t seem very decentralized at the moment (not many validators and most support coming from the foundation) but that may change if the platform is able to scale.
- keymone 5y ago
  PoW has nothing to do with throughput.
  - mattdesl 5y ago
    In theory no; but in practice yes. PoW relies on miners competing for the next block, and block size/time tends to always be a bottleneck for scalability. This is why most secure PoW blockchains have a very low throughput. Solana’s approach to PoS + PoH + optimistic confirmation allows it to scale to an order of magnitude higher throughput than typical PoW blockchains while - they claim - retaining a degree of security & decentralization superior to a PoW mechanism were it to be scaled to the same network throughput (via block size/time adjustments). This is what makes it novel - if their marketing & whitepaper is to be believed. Obviously, Solana’s throughput is achieved at the expense of security & decentralization compared to say ETH, but I suspect a PoW blockchain with nodes tuned to support 50K tps would not work at all.
    - keymone 5y ago
      PoW, PoS, PoWhatever in context of blockchains are all consensus reaching protocols. An input to consensus reaching protocol in blockchains is a block hash. Consensus reaching protocol doesn't care if that hash represents 1 transaction or 1 trillion transactions, therefore throughput doesn't depend on which consensus reaching mechanism you pick. so neither in theory nor practice, PoW has nothing to do with throughput, it's all just scammy marketing to sell you shitcoins. And in this case - extremely centralized, extremely censorable, extremely shady shitcoin.

by a1371 5y ago

mattdesl 5y ago

It appears quite different than PoW, which is how it is able to boast so much higher throughput. https://tokens-economy.gitbook.io/consensus/chain-based-proof-of-capacity-space/proof-of-history https://tokens-economy.gitbook.io/consensus/chain-based-proo... https://medium.com/solana-labs/proof-of-history-explained-by-a-water-clock-e682183417b8 https://medium.com/solana-labs/proof-of-history-explained-by... I agree it doesn’t seem very decentralized at the moment (not many validators and most support coming from the foundation) but that may change if the platform is able to scale.

keymone 5y ago
PoW has nothing to do with throughput.
- mattdesl 5y ago
  In theory no; but in practice yes. PoW relies on miners competing for the next block, and block size/time tends to always be a bottleneck for scalability. This is why most secure PoW blockchains have a very low throughput. Solana’s approach to PoS + PoH + optimistic confirmation allows it to scale to an order of magnitude higher throughput than typical PoW blockchains while - they claim - retaining a degree of security & decentralization superior to a PoW mechanism were it to be scaled to the same network throughput (via block size/time adjustments). This is what makes it novel - if their marketing & whitepaper is to be believed. Obviously, Solana’s throughput is achieved at the expense of security & decentralization compared to say ETH, but I suspect a PoW blockchain with nodes tuned to support 50K tps would not work at all.
  - keymone 5y ago
    PoW, PoS, PoWhatever in context of blockchains are all consensus reaching protocols. An input to consensus reaching protocol in blockchains is a block hash. Consensus reaching protocol doesn't care if that hash represents 1 transaction or 1 trillion transactions, therefore throughput doesn't depend on which consensus reaching mechanism you pick. so neither in theory nor practice, PoW has nothing to do with throughput, it's all just scammy marketing to sell you shitcoins. And in this case - extremely centralized, extremely censorable, extremely shady shitcoin.