4 ms·
Maybe I’ve missed something, but the eco-friendly blockchains you’re describing are virtually all using some variety of PoS (“PoH” for solana, so-called “Nakamo
by garren 5y ago
Maybe I’ve missed something, but the eco-friendly blockchains you’re describing are virtually all using some variety of PoS (“PoH” for solana, so-called “Nakamoto” PoS for Tezos.) I’ve yet to encounter anything convincing me that PoS in its various incarnations, does suffer of centralization in a way that PoW doesn’t.
Maybe blockchains are useful somewhere outside of crypto speculation, but blockchains that are marketed as eco-friendly and secure and decentralized deserve extra scrutiny in my mind.
I don’t have a dog in this hunt, but I do try to keep up to date with the technology. POW sucks in terms of resources, but PoS sucks in terms of centralization, and, it follows, security (the core selling points of blockchains)
- zeptonaut22 5y agoI'm still too much of a noob to comment on what the core selling points of blockchains are, but in my experience the core selling points vary a lot from person to person and decentralization is not always the most important concern. (For example, one key selling point is that you can leverage all of the existing financialization tools that exist for that blockchain, even if your allocation of those tokens is centralized.)
- 8note 5y agoSecurity is without doubt not a core selling point of crypto though? The design introduces security problems that it then has to solve, and in doing so, reduces security in other places