Bitcoin Forum

Hey there guys,

I see a lot of people and BTC devs talk about the size of BTC blockchain as one of the main issues to be solved in the future. What about adding PoS to BTC so it becomes both PoW and PoS coin?

Since mining difficulty is going to go up more and more, only large miners with access to cheap electricity and a lot of capital will stay in the game.

With PoS, even small miners would be able to stay in the game and benefit from holding BTC. I agree, holding BTC does not help crypto adoption and does not bring new retailers but it might bring back profitability into the game which is one of the main reasons people would accept and invest into Bitcoin.

I m not talking about high PoS, something moderate 3% a year, max.

I ve personally invested into a lot of PoW and PoS coins, DMD Diamond is my favorite, and I would like to see BTC getting some shiny new traits as well. After all, in tech world, it is all about constant innovation.

No. Stop trying to compare Bitcoin to shitcoins.
Changing such a thing would ruin Bitcoin completely. No miner would ever agree to that.

uhhhh.....no.

There are several reasons why this would be problematic
and I don't think that would solve the blockchain size
issue anyway.

This is impossible.
Question, who paid the 3% a year?
The answer is nobody, it like something fall the sky, or a perpetual motion machine.
And this is the reason why pos coins such like ppc and BC will die.
If use this mode of pos, the total of bitcoin is infinite. This is unaccepted.

I m not trying to solve the issue. These are two separate issues. I m trying to discuss a way how BTC can evolve in the future. I remember Charles Lee saying LTC does not need any gimmicks and it s fine as it is. IT IS NOT, look at the price now. These fancy gimmick attract people and increase profitability. IMO, BTC needs to bring in new stuff in the future, look at the banks and other money transmitters, they introduce new offers constantly. In order to remain profitable and interesting for new users, the product needs to improve and innovate, constantly.

We have not had anything new since day 1.

I do not want to see BTC becoming number 2, ever. Having largest acceptance s not going to work forever.

Yes, Satoshi predicted that.
We will reach a equilibrium stage where mining will be handled by those who will stay - or something a long those lines.
Go through his posts for the actual message.

Yeah, the question is: Who will be the ones that stay?
The Rockefeller?
Rothschilds?

Are we going to centralize Bitcoin?

what about instead of pure pos, a hybrid like pow/pos? It is still not free from problems but, at least it won't take the whole mining activity out of the question

Just because people have more mining power doesn't exclude anyone. It may just mean they find their bitcoins sooner than others. Bitcoin is all-inclusive, without that, it doesn't work. Then it's just another exclusive club, y'know, what all y'all hate, a centralized banking system. LOL. I'll leave that to you genius techies to figure out.

Actually it will. I'm not sure why you've said that.
If Bitcoin keeps the advantage that it has (in regards to acceptance) over the altcoins it will be priced much higher.
Switching to PoS is trying to kill the miner industry. I doubt that any big miner would accept such a fork.

More mining power at dirty cheap electricity rates it is like having big companies going to Africa or Asia to produce stuff at $50 that we buy at $500.
On the long term it might be the exact same problem.

We started with cpu mining where everyone could have tried to mine and support the network.
After that you know the story GPU mining, then FPGA, now ASIC and tomorrow what else?

Now most of us stepped out because if you don't have big money that's not sustainable.

Bitcoin will never switch to PoS. This has already been discussed at length in many threads.

Fortunately, anyone who prefers PoS can choose from a number of altcoins. No one is compelled to use bitcoin.

I write this as someone who has no strong opinion on the pros and cons of PoW vs. PoS.

Yes, that is what I had in mind. Keeping PoW and adding PoS.

The POS should have no interest, like NXT or qora, not the type of PPC's POS.

i dont think thats a move that fit to bitcoin
there are altcoins to serve different needs of people

if there are people who want to invest in a coin and earn interest by just own coins
without any need of value increase created on marketplace

then POS coins are a good alternative investment

but alway carefull where to spend money in the next hype and soon dead altcoin

or into something already years on market which can prove price stability towards BTC and add 50% POS earnings on top

i full agree its not a solution for everyone there not even enought DMD existing to give everyone the ability to get enought for beeing able stake new coins

so its more like a alternative for open mindest people who split investments

Apparently transitioning a coin from PoW to PoS (or even partial PoS) is actually far from trivial. The Lottocoin dev attempted to do this but failed because the complexity of the task was too much for him to handle:


Link to that thread: http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1028981


For those coins, stakers still get a reward. It's just that unlike Peercoin which has a fixed reward (fixed interest rate), NXT and Qora have the rewards come directly from transaction fees (variable interest rate).

What fixed rate PoS does it create inflation. Very high fixed rate PoS coins like HYPER have lots of inflation because the total coin supply keeps on going bigger and bigger. This erodes the value of the coin. It's far better to have a reward system like NXT or Qora since only then will the coin supply remain untampered with.

Bitcoin will never go PoS, not as a hybrid nor as a 100% PoS system.

Mining will last until 2140 anyway, so there is no need for PoS. Bitcoin is not a bank, so there should be no interest from PoS :)

Changing to PoS could solve some problems, like the problem of current miners crying for more fiat as income.
But, really, it's not gonna happen. Ever.

Thread #29801 trying to push alt coins with less security.

People can't even agree to a simple fork to increase the blocksize to 20MB. Why would you think that forking Bitcoin to a Piece-of-Shit coin could stand any chance of happening?

I like the idea of adding TaPoS as long as it doesn't interfere with bitcoins planned disinflation and PoW security model. You do no need consensus or a fork to make this happen either. Simply create a  TaPoS/PoS blockchain and add functionality to a bitcoin wallet where the distribution of the PoS tokens mirrors BTC distribution. These TaPoS tokens could be used as another security layer and to provide 1 second confirmations.

Within your wallet the the TaPoS tokens would be hidden and non trade able for usability and so this isn't a competing alt.

I.E... The user receives a payment and the wallet immediately starts confirming the transaction with TaPoS every second and than after approximately 10 minutes the regular PoW confirmation comes in with the wallet showing a distinction between types of confirmations. Thus in a decentralized manner you can get a higher degree of confidence that a cup of coffee you sold is secure but with more expensive items you could wait till 1-3 PoW confirmations came through ontop of the TaPoS confirmations.

Added benefit - This could be a nice warning that a 51% attack is occurring and allow the seller time to hold off on the transaction when the TaPoS confirmations are failing but the PoW confirmations are being approved.

The future of mining may be introduced by 21 Inc-

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1053406.0

It seems like you dont understand what POS means , and it is not about someone paying you for the 3 % or anything. perhaps you want to read about POS coins again


Changing BTC to POS wont make it to be altcoin but I do agree that it will be a very useless thing to do .


changing to POS wont help anyone because if BTC is change into POS then the value of it will drop too, leaving it meaningless to be just useless coins and not BTC anymore. Forking it in 20mb block will atleast make some decent effect to that

I hear constantly about how miners would not agree to fork and introduce PoS. What miners? If we continue this road, in 2 years we ll have 4-5 big farms in the world mining 95% of BTC while the rest ll be cover while hobbyists who mine at a loss, simply for the sake of good old times.

We try to avoid centralization but without any serious improvement, we are heading towards it.

21

You've said nothing new. This was said multiple times in the past and most people should know this by now (I hope).
How about you present a solution that is viable? People tend to complain and just write about problems rather than present potential solutions.
Switching to PoS is not a viable solution. Until someone comes up with something, things are just going to be that way.

obviously switching bitcoin to pos isn't happening.  but still I'm curious to know, don't pos coins still have to deal with blockchain growth anyway?  if not, why not?

Even if there will be 4-5 big farms, I doubt that it will be own by 1 single person , perhaps it could be a joint of several companies or people so it is not truly a centralization. Obviously switching into POS is not helping at all because it might destroy the value of bitcoin . There is some improvement but alot is disagree with it like the 20mb block fork

The price seems to drop whether we keep the current over-expensive mining or not. The meaning of the coins doesn't (or should not) come from how expensive the mining gear is.
The price was rising when people were hiding the money into Bitcoin (also with help from Gox bot). Since then people realized that Bitcoin can be traced and wallet can be somehow linked to person. What if they'll go for Monero, eh?

The 20Mb fork may have some meaning. Also having per kb fee is a reasonable option. However, the history shows that bitcoin is extremely reticent to forks.

Maybe someday Bitcoin will drop the fear of the forking, maybe it will take a look what the "shitcoins" can innovate and learn from them. Being the first may not be such an advantage after 5 more years, and just debating and over-debating is not too helpful.

Yes it is not based on the mining equipment and of course even if you need such expensive mining equipment and the price of mining still larger than the current price , what do you think of getting bitcoin from POS? it will ofcourse be such lower. In addition, some feature of shitcoins is a great feature, no doubt about that but changing to POS is not a good thing to follow

I never said that PoS is the best option (actually, I agree it's one of the worse ones), but it's an option.
However, it doesn't matter as long as Bitcoin has fork-o-phobia.

Having BTC rely on 4-5 big farms is much more dangerous then BTC fork. Remember Amhash? I do not see any other way we can maintain decentralization in the future.

The point is this big farms can't keep the share forever. And even switch to pos, it also could be only a few person own most of coins. The person who want to mine more coins will buy more coins.
There is nothing changed.

Why not? 3-4 big farms I know of are the ones who were the biggest a year ago.

It is not yet clear about this thing on which is far more dangerous, as far as I know, people have a phobia with fork but I do support the 20mb fork but not changing to POS. As I said even if there is 4-5 big farms, it would nt be owned by the same person so it would not looks like a centralization

If it is going to be Pos and reward people holding onto bitcoin I'm afraid we are introducing more supply to the market right now instead of trying to achieve the opposite. The system of pow isn't perfect and neither does adding pos is going to help either. And how about the cap limit? We have to consider on that as well.

Stop talking about farms, start talking about pools. There are thousands o farms out there and none are even close to reaching a dangerous percentage o the hashrate.
If you take a look at hashrate distribution charts, things have been changing a lot over time. Some pools had huge shares in the past and now almost have none.
Also you need to consider something else. PoS is bad. It will make the rich much more richer.

good point.  Yes it is a few big pools but many "farms".
Anyway, PoS is still theoretically broken.  Although
it seems to work in practice in coins like Nxt, it is
doubtful if it could scale because of costless simulation
which has been discussed many times.

You can agree of disagree but classic PoW is going to die.

Maybe in a year, maybe in 5 years but it is going to die. It is expensive, it s waste of energy, it generates negative extrenalities and it ll die.

Whether PoS or something else s going to be the next step in evolution of crypto, that I cannot claim. But BTC ll have to adapt and improve. Or fade away.

Considering BTC as something final and untouchable in the crypto world is not good. There has be a constant tendency towards innovation and improvements.

What is "negative extrenalities"?

Nope, but PoW isn't as well... right now is the best we got, but clearly is not ideal. Even people like Gavin are saying it's a waste, and we should eventually find a superior way to deal with all of this.

Why cannot waste energy be recycled into a useful byproduct? Can you not think of some positive externalities of PoW?

1) Spurring ASIC and chip development
2) Encouraging innovation into datacenter and cooling technologies
3) Creating new technologies that recycle waste heat for useful needs
4) Providing a source of security that cannot be easily manufactured and costs real money and real resources to attack
5) Removing the ability of direct human involvement from being able to manipulate or attack the network by separating the power dynamic between the full nodes, miners and developers

Perhaps there will be a version of PoR or a "curecoin" like PoW version could be used in the future. Curecoin current has to depend both on ASIC SHA256 mining and GPU folding for security so doesn't represent a good example of a 100% folding PoW. I could see a small possibility of a future PoR/newer PoW algo slowly being introduced into the reward structure and eventually replace PoW if the benefits are much better and an alt can show it is secure.

This is how Wiki defines it: "A negative externality (also called "external cost" or "external diseconomy") is an economic activity that imposes a negative effect on an unrelated third party."

In other words, negative aftereffects generated by the waste of energy caused by PoW mining.

Did a magic ball tell you that that is going to happen?
I personally don't mine PoW. I know because I was a miner who at a time was barely paying for the electricity. Considering all the ways that humans are wasting energy, there is nothing wrong with wasting some for Bitcoin.
PoS isn't the next step because it is not as safe as people think. You'd need to dig up a few threads to find out why.

why worry about it, can always be changed in the future, i mean hard fork aren't that scary, we are approching one for the block size, we will make other to improve the overall bitcoin world

maybe the better alternative isn't out yet, pos ins't exactly the answer and it is also an old protocol like pow

POS may be the future of Bitcoin mining, but not now.(Sure i am taking about NXT's type of POS)
From now, there is no POS coin success, the reason is, POW is still the most and only fair way to distribute coins.

Sorry, I am not agree with this issue. Changing of anything will destroy Bitcoin.

Yes it is expensive because of the rise of difficulty and also the price is lowering day by day. What you are suggesting to be POS for the sake of decentralization wont solve this issue because if bitcoin is to switch into POS then people could easily create a staking pool for that. BTC is not final and it needs to be change for the better, but changing to POS is not a better thing than the current one

Yes POS is the Future of all mining.

Bitcoin was the first of its kind, and most of its protocol was based on things that are no loner a factor of the equation. The founders did not factor in for GPU Mining much less ASICS, and this is right now the downfall of Bitcoin. Large farms are manipulating the bitcoin network, whether people want to admit it or not. the original design was based on basic computer computational power and did not factor in the use of much faster machines like ASICS. the 2016 block difficulty re-target is killing bitcoin right now, 35 minute to 2 hour confirms, this is because the network is being manipulated.  I mean look at the difficulty compared to reward right now, not lets move into the future a bit, and think where will that difficulty be when the block reward is 3 BTC per block found? how many machines will you need to successfully mine 3 whole BTC. with the continual downward movement in price this does not look so good for bitcoins future.

Everyone thinks, "oh it will be ok as people leave the mining scene the difficulty will go down. But think about this, let's say i have 20PHS of mining power and I point that hash at the BTC network on block 2000 of the 2016 re-target mark, Once the 2016th block has been processed and the difficulty re-target takes place I move that 20 PHS off the bitcoin network and mine other coins( or If I am a real asshole and am doing it just to hurt bitcoin I just turn the mine off) and I do this that way every time the block re-target some up? what happens to bitcoin difficulty then? if you think this is already not happening? your naive, why do you think it is we have 35 minute to 2 hour confirmation times, because the network does not have the hash to support the difficulty.

In addition to this the blind faith lovers of bitcoin will say, Oh when the reward goes down the demand will go up, why, because there is such a huge demand for bitcoin, what is that demand, silk road is gone, look at the price, hackers are stealing every coin they can get any way they can get it, unethical companies scamming people, unprofitable investment opportunities ran by the most greedy of people.  What is this imaginary demand you feel will take over? By the time the reward gets to 3 BTC per solved block there will be more BTC on the market than can be used. Hence why we have nothing but downward sideways movement at the present. There is no real demand for the coin, and what Bitcoin had for it (illegal or not) has died and will not come back, as it proved to be less anonymous than it advertised.

POS coins do not use such large equipment, and the network can not be manipulated so easily. If you want to manipulate this mining it will cost you, you will have to either buy a lot of coins to do it, and hold them thus removing a portion of coins off the market driving the value up. But then you have to stay connected to the network 24/7 you have to hold the coins and never sell them, so it is not easily manipulated like POW coins.

Your funny, the hardware you need in POS mining is the exact same hardware bitcoin was founded around a computer connected to the network. the POS coins are NOT created instantly, you should read some of the coins, HyperStake has an 8 day maturity, that sure does not seem very "instant" to me A lot of the coins have an 8 hour maturity with about a 12 hour time before they will stake, again not so "instant" is it. And you wont get anything if your not connected to the network with your hardware (a computer)

And what is the demand we have for bitcoin, where was it created? Hype and its tradable value really is all that impacts its value right now? The one thing Bitcoin had going for it was illegal operations on silk road, and the banks made sure that came to a stop no matter how many people were hurt by their decision.

All the banks cared about was the massive negative attention they could bring to bitcoin, (who was imposing on thier trillion dollar a year holdings from drug money) and ruining the one thing that made it thrive. I mean ask yourself when was the last time a bank, its owners and its executives were held responsible for knowingly holding millions of dollars in drug money? They are not stupid, and they dont care where the money is coming from, all they care about is you hold your millions of dollars of drug money in their bank so they can day trade with it and turn it into billions of profit for themselves.

So in the end, POS coins dont need massive amounts of expensive hardware, a simple computer connected to the network is suffice to support their network and process transactions. they also have the ability to create thier own blocks, where as Bitcoin must have a transaction in order to keep the blockchain moving along, POS coins create new blocks everytime they stake, which helps to secure the movement on the blockchain. What happens to bitcoin if there are 0 transaction for 15 days?

Most of what you are saying is pure FUD.  I guess you don't really know what you're talking about.
If there are 0 transactions for 15 days, blocks are still formed.  There will still always be the
coinbase transaction awarded to the miner. 

That's wrong. Satoshi made a clear statement where he expected big farms to do both the mining and having full nodes as Bitcoin started to grow. This whole “CPU mining” stuff was only at the very beginning, and clearly impractical for the worldwide network Bitcoin aims to be.

Transaction is the operative word here,

There is no reward if if you do not have a block to mine, there is no block if there are no transactions.

In POS when you stake a block is split creating 2 new blocks, and you can structure this to happen at your will with some of the coins, HyperStake has a split threshold you can set. You can also combine all your coins in one block once a month and allow it split and split and split for the next 30 days until you combine them.

you can't do that with bitcoin yet.

It is all FUD to you bitcoin lovers until you guys accept the facts that bitcoin has a lot of problems that could lead to its failure as the dominant coin of choice. There was a lot that the founders did not expect to happen and a lot more that they did not factor in because it didn't exist when bitcoin was founded, and all that is just beginning to bite them in the ass now.

And where is Satoshi at today.......... Oh thats right he left I wonder why?

The miner creates the coinbase transaction to pay himself for mining the block.
That's included in the block.  It's always been that way.

So what you are saying is if everyone stops using bitcoin and no transactions are being created one can assume from that point on miners would then be processing their own created transactions?

Please inform me again what happens when a 51% attack on bitcoin is successfully accomplished?


Here is one thing bitcoin people can not deny and when you figure out why this is, you will understand my "FUD" a lot better.

Bitcoin transaction takes 25 minutes to 2 hours to confirm, a Netcoin  transaction takes less than 5 minutes. You explain why this is. then I will tell you the truth of why it is happening ;)

I think Pos has its advantages and disadvantages. But I prefer POW personally.

If "everyone stops using a coin", then its a moot point because no one is using it,
however even if that happened, blocks would still form if there was even a single
miner who was operating.

The average time to confirm for Bitcoin is 10 minutes, however
the transactions process within seconds.  

When was there ever a successful 51% attack on Bitcoin?

I also wonder why. But that's tangential to the discussion. You said it was not considered by the core devs, which is a lie. Get your facts straight, first of all.

Yo are so full of it,

FYI I send over a dozen transactions out on payouts for my site every Monday, I also do transactions from my payment processor to my exchange account every single day, the transaction process is on average 5 to 10 minutes and the confirmed transaction that makes it spendable is anywhere from 25 minutes up to 2 hours. I am not reading this I actually experience it. You are quoting what bitcoin is supposed to accomplish which is not what it actually accomplishes.


And guess what I can prove it

On 2015-05-03 13:33:10 (https://blockchain.info/tx-index/2540cf1b407043bf078b54be6d254c5be77f61752501f662e14b1398f4852e91) I sent my first payout
I sent a total of 18 transactions so
on 2015-05-03 15:02:22 (https://blockchain.info/tx-index/42e2fc187341f06524aeab2e9e5a6825cced4c5d5c2cc7d02177ce56b33ffc68) I sent the last one.

I did nothing else, I input the amount clicked on the username in my wallet and clicked send, waited on the transaction to process and moved to the next investor and paid him.

You said it takes seconds to process a transaction , well then lets say 20 seconds per transaction just to be safe, it should have taken me (by your theory) 6 minutes to send those 18 transaction. All the usernames are stored in the wallet so all I have to do is click their name, input the amount and click send, input the private key and click ok

But if you look on my transactions page (https://stakeminers.com/transactions.php) and from the proof above it actually took me an hour and a half to process 18 transactions. Which works out to be what? Roughly 5 minutes just to process a transaction.

And feel free to compare it to the other weeks and you will see as I do payouts I do them all at the same time, and they all are a lot more than "seconds" per transaction.


Satoshi left Bitocin in Mid 2010 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Bitcoin) get your facts straight ;) you can nnot factor in something that has not been invented yet ;) The tech was there (AMD tech was used for gaming only in 2010) but the ASIC miners were not ;)

The delay you're seeing is because of the third
party service you're using. 

Here's the real times.
https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-confirmation-time

First let me say a transaction from a payment processor to an exchange is on the bitcoin network directly, the wallets they use that are integrated into their site are usually daemon wallets, thus those transaction do not go thru a 3rd party, its a direct transaction from  one daemon to another, yet I still have to wait sometimes 35 minutes to an hour to get 2 confirms on my deposits. As far as the transaction showing up in the account, ther can be a delay depending on how their cron job is structured yes, but 35 minutes to an HOUR, and hour sometimes,, thats not 10 minute confirms by any sense of the words.

For example I processed a transaction at 5/11/2015 02:03:08am   It has still not shown up on the exchange 25 minutes later and still has 0 confirms.

And as far as the 3rd party escape goat is concerned, unfortunately the age old saying actions speak louder than words falls into place here, a user doesn't care what a chart says, what matters to new users is what is actually happening, its great that a chart is showing us a basis to go by, but the truth of the matter is new users are more likely to use a 3rd party over downloading the blockchain at this point. Its easier and faster, and thus it reflects the times that it takes in those 3rd parts services, what goes on in the backend they can care less about, what happens to them in real life is what maters the most, because those are the times that are actually effecting them.

The bottom line here is my POS coins will get into my wallet and confirmed in minutes, my bitcoins can take sometimes hours.

I use electrum, I don't download the blockchain and my transactions take seconds.
Also i've withdrew from coinbase and the transactions were less than a minute.

Anyway, if you like PoS coins better, no one is stopping you.  Go for it! ;D

Hi.....

The Bitcoin mining process can be a complicated concept to grasp for those that are not tech-savvy. Many people want to get involved in mining but don’t pursue, it because they get discouraged when they don’t understand how it works. :'( :'( :'(

Why should you try getting involved into something that you don't understand? Why don't you go drill for oil, or mine diamonds?
Just because you don't understand how it works, doesn't mean that: a) It should be simplified because of you; b) There are no people that understand it.