5 ms·

Proof of stake is useless. It just give all the powers to the current stakeholders. So it’s not trustless by definition since you need to trust the stakeholder

Proof of stake is useless. It just give all the powers to the current stakeholders. So it’s not trustless by definition since you need to trust the stakeholders.

tromp 4y ago
Well, PoW needs to assume that 51% of miners is honest, while PoS needs to assume that 51% of stakers is honest. The bigger downsides of PoS to me are that 1) a pure PoS system starts with the creators holding all supply and can keep an arbitrary portion for themselves while selling the rest as they please 2) the truth in PoS is subjective (nodes need to rely on other nodes to determine what is the current state of the system).
- akrymski 4y ago
  In PoS systems validators can vote for both chains in case of a fork, as there is nothing at stake. It's not about honesty. It's about resources being committed.
  - FabHK 4y ago
    Exactly. The ETH PoS FAQ is a good introduction to the problem. In a nutshell, when there are two competing chains, A) in PoW you A1) either put all your resources (hash power) behind one chain, and get the block, thus the mining reward, with probability equal to your proportion of the total hash power (as before) assuming that chain ends up the longest chain (so you have a strong incentive to pick the "correct" one), or A2) distribute your hash power between the two competing chains, but then each of them only gets half the hash power, and you reduce your probability of getting the mining reward to half, thus halving your expected reward. At any rate, as soon as one of the chains is ahead, there is a very strong incentive to fall in line with the LCR (longest chain rule) and place all your bets on the putative winner, rather than diluting your expensive hash power. B) In PoS, you can just continue staking on both competing chains, and whichever wins, you got get your mining reward (as usual, with probability equal to your proportion of the total stake). No incentive to settle on a winner early ("nothing at stake"), so just keep your options open by supporting both chains, and thus no incentive to congeal on a winner quickly. https://eth.wiki/en/concepts/proof-of-stake-faqs https://eth.wiki/en/concepts/proof-of-stake-faqs
akrymski 4y ago
Indeed. I fail to see how validators in PoS systems are any different to eg shareholders of Visa.

Proof of stake is useless. It just give all the powers to the current stakeholders. So it’s not trustless by definition since you need to trust the stakeholders.

tromp 4y ago

Well, PoW needs to assume that 51% of miners is honest, while PoS needs to assume that 51% of stakers is honest. The bigger downsides of PoS to me are that 1) a pure PoS system starts with the creators holding all supply and can keep an arbitrary portion for themselves while selling the rest as they please 2) the truth in PoS is subjective (nodes need to rely on other nodes to determine what is the current state of the system).

akrymski 4y ago
In PoS systems validators can vote for both chains in case of a fork, as there is nothing at stake. It's not about honesty. It's about resources being committed.
- FabHK 4y ago
  Exactly. The ETH PoS FAQ is a good introduction to the problem. In a nutshell, when there are two competing chains, A) in PoW you A1) either put all your resources (hash power) behind one chain, and get the block, thus the mining reward, with probability equal to your proportion of the total hash power (as before) assuming that chain ends up the longest chain (so you have a strong incentive to pick the "correct" one), or A2) distribute your hash power between the two competing chains, but then each of them only gets half the hash power, and you reduce your probability of getting the mining reward to half, thus halving your expected reward. At any rate, as soon as one of the chains is ahead, there is a very strong incentive to fall in line with the LCR (longest chain rule) and place all your bets on the putative winner, rather than diluting your expensive hash power. B) In PoS, you can just continue staking on both competing chains, and whichever wins, you got get your mining reward (as usual, with probability equal to your proportion of the total stake). No incentive to settle on a winner early ("nothing at stake"), so just keep your options open by supporting both chains, and thus no incentive to congeal on a winner quickly. https://eth.wiki/en/concepts/proof-of-stake-faqs https://eth.wiki/en/concepts/proof-of-stake-faqs

akrymski 4y ago

Indeed. I fail to see how validators in PoS systems are any different to eg shareholders of Visa.