5 ms·
> the more you have of the capital the more you influence the system That's not how PoS works, though?
by bibabaloo 4y ago
> the more you have of the capital the more you influence the system
That's not how PoS works, though?
- rglullis 4y agoDo not feed the troll. Flag and move along...
- capableweb 4y agoWell, the problem with this is that the misinformation stays around, influencing future discussions when it comes up again, when people keep repeating the same thing over and over. It would be more interesting to discuss new flaws in the protocol, or things that generally haven't been discussed before.
- drdrek 4y agoDo you think that I mean direct influence? that they can reprogram contracts? Don't straw man me. Large miners do have power, the power to destabilize the system. The same power large POW syndicates have that delays POS will be there in POS only in a more direct literal way. What do you think will happen if a more decentralized verification system will be proposed once there are people and institutions that will have large sums of invested money and effort? do you think that they will just give away the financial power they have? this is not how any system involving human works and cryptographic technology is not going to change that.
- rglullis 4y ago> this is not how any system involving human works and cryptographic technology is not going to change that. How is a system that allows people with ~$30k to have any type of influence worse than the status quo?
- haarts 4y agoHow does it work?
- rglullis 4y agoPoS does not give you any power to change the rules of the system, it only makes sure that those who are invested in the system get (slightly) rewarded for good behavior and (heavily) penalized for bad behavior.
- hellcow 4y agoThat “bad behavior” is precisely what the above poster meant by “changing the rules of the system.” If you or a syndicate have a large enough stake, you can manipulate the transactions which occur.
- rglullis 4y ago"By large enough", you mean 67% to attempt to do it with some chance of success, and if it fails it gets slashed. Not to mention that no one would be interested in using any network where this level of centralization could pose a real threat, and the most likely outcome of such a scenario would be a loss of the value of the native token.
- cowtools 4y ago...but if it succeeds, then everyone else gets slashed. The network has no concept of "truth". PoS doesn't fix this, it just puts all your eggs in one basket. Who would be interested in using any network which exists only for the profit of the existing stakeholders? Why not just fork it?
- aeternum 4y agoForking it is the real threat. If some entity does end up controlling 67% or doing something the community does not agree with, people will just stop using the chain. This already happened once with Ethereum.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- splintercell 4y agoThe move to PoS is the most brutal attack Bitcoin ecosystem will face, there will be no reason why regulators wouldn't ban PoW currencies, this is why expect all sorts of 'motivated reasoning' coming out from the BTC citadel.