peercoin

3 ms·

1.
by peercoin 9y ago
At this point this is just trolling. The proof of stake you are describing is of your own invention and doesn't address how systems like Peercoin or algorand actually function. Starting from scratch with a new genesis block? Sure go ah
2.
by peercoin 9y ago
algorand is academic at this point with evaluation on ec2. Though the paper is available and an implementation will be following. Peercoin is one of the first working proof of stake implementations that has been running for close to 5 years
3.
by peercoin 9y ago
>An honest mining majority is a hard requirement of Bitcoin. But proof-of-stake doesn't solve the problem of collusion -- it's even more susceptible to it since it's so easy to recreate valid-looking chains. With Bitcoin,
4.
by peercoin 9y ago
>> In the worst case scenario -- where an exploit spreads through a security hole in the reference implementation, and replaces the blockchain with its own copy, silently assigning the balance of an old, rarely used account to the att
5.
by peercoin 9y ago
> Why not move to proof of stake? >> Because it doesn't make sense. If a chain, on which a token exists, needs securing, you can't use that chain's token to secure itself. I mean I'm not entirely sure what this
6.
by peercoin 9y ago
Why not move to proof of stake? Proof of Work mining used in bitcon to secure the network as originally proposed in Nakomoto's paper has huge energy requirements. The result is large energy hungry mines as shown by the article. In addi