Another stake in the Eth vampire: Why proof of stake has no value:
Since Satoshi did not solve the Byzantine generals problem, this means confirmations are completely arbitrary. So why are two confirmations more useful in Bitcoin (PoW) than one? Because it's an open entropy system where over a period of time, it's either unlikely or statistically impossible for someone to maintain a monopoly on block validation when there is no upper limit to confirmations.
Recursive systems like proof of stake tend to permanently monopolize block validation by design, with no real fault or state recovery to fix it once it goes off the rails. This makes a proof of stake confirmation essentially worthless due to being a bounded entropy system.
On top of being worthless, proof of stake is also a permissioned ledger. The purpose of mining in Bitcoin is to create a permanent decentralized exchange peg, which thus results in a permissionless system.
|
|
|
|
Next lesson for the shills: Why proof of stake has no value:
Since Satoshi did not solve the Byzantine generals problem, this means confirmations are completely arbitrary. So why are two confirmations more useful in Bitcoin (PoW) than one? Because it's an open entropy system where over a period of time, it's either unlikely or statistically impossible for someone to maintain a monopoly on block validation when there is no upper limit to confirmations.
Recursive systems like proof of stake tend to permanently monopolize block validation by design, with no real fault or state recovery to fix it once it goes off the rails. This makes a proof of stake confirmation essentially worthless due to being a bounded entropy system.
On top of being worthless, proof of stake is also a permissioned ledger. The purpose of mining in Bitcoin is to create a permanent decentralized exchange peg, which thus results in a permissionless system.
|
|
|
|
Let's move on to the next subject: Why proof of stake has no value:
Since Satoshi did not solve the Byzantine generals problem, this means confirmations are completely arbitrary. So why are two confirmations more useful in Bitcoin (PoW) than one? Because it's an open entropy system where over a period of time, it's either unlikely or statistically impossible for someone to maintain a monopoly on block validation when there is no upper limit to confirmations.
Recursive systems like proof of stake tend to permanently monopolize block validation by design, with no real fault or state recovery to fix it once it goes off the rails. This makes a proof of stake confirmation essentially worthless due to being a bounded entropy system.
On top of being worthless, proof of stake is also a permissioned ledger. The purpose of mining in Bitcoin is to create a permanent decentralized exchange peg, which thus results in a permissionless system.
|
|
|
|
Here you go, Eth shills. Besides the other issues that pertain only to Eth: Why proof of stake has no value:
Since Satoshi did not solve the Byzantine generals problem, this means confirmations are completely arbitrary. So why are two confirmations more useful in Bitcoin (PoW) than one? Because it's an open entropy system where over a period of time, it's either unlikely or statistically impossible for someone to maintain a monopoly on block validation when there is no upper limit to confirmations.
Recursive systems like proof of stake tend to permanently monopolize block validation by design, with no real fault or state recovery to fix it once it goes off the rails. This makes a proof of stake confirmation essentially worthless due to being a bounded entropy system.
On top of being worthless, proof of stake is also a permissioned ledger. The purpose of mining in Bitcoin is to create a permanent decentralized exchange peg, which thus results in a permissionless system.
|
|
|
|
Capital investments to issue proof of stake coins that keep wealth re-distributed are negligible.
Let me demonstrate why you Eth shills have no idea what you're talking about. Why proof of stake has no value: Since Satoshi did not solve the Byzantine generals problem, this means confirmations are completely arbitrary. So why are two confirmations more useful in Bitcoin (PoW) than one? Because it's an open entropy system where over a period of time, it's either unlikely or statistically impossible for someone to maintain a monopoly on block validation when there is no upper limit to confirmations. Recursive systems like proof of stake tend to permanently monopolize block validation by design, with no real fault or state recovery to fix it once it goes off the rails. The act of introducing interest compounds this problem even more. This makes a proof of stake confirmation essentially worthless due to being a bounded entropy system. On top of being worthless, proof of stake is also a permissioned ledger. The purpose of mining in Bitcoin is to create a permanent decentralized exchange peg, which thus results in a permissionless system. |
|
|
|
hasn't really added anything new since 2009
Proof of stake, like all recursive systems, aren't decentralized - they're permissioned ledgers. Your fraudulent statement is actually backwards. No altcoin has improved on BTC at all besides ring signatures and zk-snarks for anonymity, but those may or may not be useful depending on if BTC adds anonymity functions itself via sidechains or other method. |
|
|
|
LISK is a major major scam. Remember it's by the Cryptsy crooks and a failed cold fusion web developer. Stay out folks.
Lisk, IOTA, Ethereum, and Waves are all permissioned ledger IPO cash grab scams. Blame Come from Beyond and his cronies for starting the Cambrian explosion of IPO scams with NXT. Now we are beginning to reach the point of peak IPO scam and they will cause the altcoin market to implode. |
|
|
|
|
Ok, let's ignore the hype and get to the real question. Why would anyone want a permissioned ledger or federated chain (all PoS coins are permissioned ledgers) over a permisionless chain (bitcoin)? The US dollar is already a federated chain. Lowering the overhead for banker's internal systems so they profit more is of no interest to people that don't own shares in banks. You have to use something that isn't a permissioned ledger or federated chain to escape the usury, debt based, banking trap.
|
|
|
|
Eth is the new king!
Eth is about to implode no matter how many 1 star shill accounts you create: I'd be much more worried about how much the Eth price is going to implode. It's a single entity pumping Eth into an even bigger bubble than it already was, who is also going to exit before the Eth DAO can dump on May 28th. So first the Eth pumper dumps, then the Eth DAO people dump, then the Bitcoin halving happens to dump Eth more. What do you suppose the Eth price is going to be after 3 mega dumps?
|
|
|
|
|
So Lisk is now affiliated with Edward Snowden because some guy is going to walk into a crowded building that Edward Snowden is speaking to...I see. Maybe I'm affiliated with African Dictator Mugabe since I once saw him on youtube.
|
|
|
|
Chinese miners can decide tomorrow to change code to produce more than 21 million coins if they think their profit is not enough. Wrong. People already attempted this at the first Bitcoin halving by trying to fork to a continuous 50 block reward chain and it was a miserable failure. Even if you temporarily rented all hash power on earth to try and get temporary consensus, the economic majority would stay on the normal chain and miners would be forced to switch back and mine on it after their coup fails. Miners are forced to go where the economic majority is, not vice versa. Same reason miners are not mining Borgcoin for profit right now; there is no economic majority there: Borgcoin has 500,000,000 coins to be minted. 500 million being based on the mass ton of the borg trans warp ship with a maximum rated speed of 29.968 warp factor with advanced trans warp drive. The fastest trans warp drive ship ever to exist. Join the collective now.  |
|
|
|
|
Unless the block reward is independent from the coin creator, it's a cash grab scam. Proof of stake is a permissioned ledger and not an actual decentralized network as well. Once you've figured out that nobody in altcoins has actually improved upon the consensus mechanism of PoW, you'll figure out there's no reason for any of these coins to exist - with the possible exception of ring signatures or zk-snarks for anonymity. It all depends on if Bitcoin adds it's own anonymity solutions or not.
|
|
|
|
Wealth will be distributed and re-distributed many times for the simple reason that code can be cloned unlike material wealth like gold. You don't expect in the future one global ledger, one world currency like most nerds here, do you?
So why don't you go and try to convince people your copper ingot should have the same value as a gold ingot in real life? The only thing giving value to gold is scarcity and network effect. You should have no trouble buying up all the cheap copper to corner the market and then presenting your copper as the superior solution to the world. Try it and tell us how it works out. |
|
|
|
|
Ethereum shills getting desperate. They can't find anyone to dump their artificially pumped bubble on so they're even spamming this section now.
|
|
|
|
|
China didn't follow that orchestrated BTC shakeout attempt since Huobi was still at $448 a minute ago. The single entity pumping Eth is pretending to operate from a position of strength, but he's likely underwater even more from raising the Eth price. He knows the $130 million denominated in Ethereum for the DAO is going to have a massive selloff causing the Eth price to crash on May 28th, so he's trying to raise the Eth price to find momentum traders to dump on before that date.
We will first see the Eth manipulator himself drop the hammer and dump, then the Eth DAO will dump even harder, then BTC halving will cause Eth to dump even more. It's going to get real ugly for Eth soon.
|
|
|
|
Already covered why Vitalik likes proof of stake. Even though all recursive systems (PoS) are inherently permissioned ledgers and not decentralized networks, he has some crazy, far leftist view that capitalism will cease to exist and everything will be run by authoritarian technocrats (which I'm sure he loves to pretend he will be one). PoW only works in capitalist systems. PoS, just like all permissioned ledgers (the US dollar is a federated chain), is ideal for usury based, neo-feudalistic, slave plantations. Vitalik slobbering over the idea of being trapped inside a completely vertically integrated, centrally planned, communist regime where capitalism doesn't exist, and all means of production and methods of travel are controlled by the state: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5VVmTI9F9s&feature=youtu.be&t=168 |
|
|
|
|
Nice attempted shakeout Eth shills, but China is still at $449. Even BTCE is $445 haha.
|
|
|
|
Have fun getting dumped on by the Ethereum pumper, Eth shills: I'd be much more worried about how much the Eth price is going to implode. It's a single entity pumping it into an even bigger bubble than it already was, who is also going to exit before the Eth DAO can dump on May 28th. So first the Eth pumper dumps, then the Eth DAO people dump, then the Bitcoin halving happens to dump Eth more. What do you suppose the Eth price is going to be after 3 mega dumps?
|
|
|
|
Don't worry, people who work at Eth like Nick Szabo also know proof of stake doesn't work. Why do you think he wanted Eth to stay on PoW? All recursive systems are by definition not even decentralized currencies/networks in the first place.
Nick and others are biased. A guy that works at Eth is "biased"? You're a known Eth shill/scammer, but please feel free to explain that nonsensical comment. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
