With all the hundreds of altcoins who can keep them straight? Many of them are hybrids but lean toward PoS. Ethereum waffles but will probably be PoS. I should have looked up the names rather than pull them out of memory, but this topic makes me weary. I prefer to let the market decide.
Fair enough, but Ethereum is going to be PoW: Ethereum will be a hashimoto dagger IO bound PoW consensus mechanism. The latest under review is here under PoC7: https://github.com/ethereum/cpp-ethereum/wikihttp://gavwood.com/Paper.pdfSo WTH were ethers for? Well, if a better PoW comes along, then Bitcoin can adapt it. I try to listen to Buterin, but while he understands the mechanics of these technologies, his ideology is inconsistent. That's just his youth and I don't hold it against him personally, but until you have the kind of resolve Satoshi has, you cannot be truly innovative. |
|
|
|
Right. And by the same token PoS absolutely require fancy names like Monero, Ethereum, and Peercoin, and heavy marketing to succeed. Marketing a PoW like Doge gets notoriety, but the notion of actual work kills the romance. Ultimately, future PoS coins will be premined (or pre minted, or pre birthed or whatever) by whatever corporations can afford the best advertising.
I understand the point you are trying to make but you are doing so in the worst possible way by suggesting all those coins are PoS. Ethereum will be PoW. Monero is PoW Peercoin is PoW/PoS Out of all the examples given you just had to use the few PoW examples which invalidated your argument ? With all the hundreds of altcoins who can keep them straight? Many of them are hybrids but lean toward PoS. Ethereum waffles but will probably be PoS. I should have looked up the names rather than pull them out of memory, but this topic makes me weary. I prefer to let the market decide. |
|
|
|
Ripple is dead.
RIP ripple.
I didn't invest in Ripple and less doing it now. But saying it is dead after a 7x rise... lol, sure. Ripple has no volume and few exchanges. It's reporting is less reliable than Bitcoin's. But believe what you want. |
|
|
|
POS=no production cost=no value
If I can produce a coin without any cost, why should I pay any thing valuable to exchange it??? I will just go ahead to mine it
Fiat money can do this because there is a law to force its circulation, and the cost to make that law can be a war, which costs millions of times more energy than POW mining
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=848881.0Point 7 Quoting a FUD thread won't win any credibility. |
|
|
|
Sausage fest? I'm a girl and I'm sure other girls on here would love the idea, it won't be 50/50 but maybe 70/30?
You need at least 33½. |
|
|
|
 Bitcoin is dead and your little Colored Coin too! |
|
|
|
I would summarize things as follows:
Given the same distribution (issuance),
the energy cost is going to be same no matter what
scheme you use, but PoW is the simplest, most
proven, and arguably the most fair.
I've seen you mention that before but can't quite wrap my head around the notion that PoS will use a lot of energy. Can you give a scenario? It's explained in this article: http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-and-mining/It depends on implementation of the coin, but something like making alternate chains or addresses...spending CPU power to compete for the rewards until its no longer profitable to keep doing so. OK, I get that. This is completely clueless. A simple block production bond system makes it unprofitable to ever attempt to produce blocks on more than one chain at a time. This is actually yet another permutation of the naive nothing at stake "problem" that has been solved ages ago by DPOS.
It's quite amazing that people are so emotionally invested in proof of waste that they continue to cling on to these non-issues in desperation.
Yeah, um VMs would do the trick. Also it appears your solution is to increase energy requirements anyway. |
|
|
|
I would summarize things as follows:
Given the same distribution (issuance),
the energy cost is going to be same no matter what
scheme you use, but PoW is the simplest, most
proven, and arguably the most fair.
I've seen you mention that before but can't quite wrap my head around the notion that PoS will use a lot of energy. Can you give a scenario? |
|
|
|
You haven't heard? Ethereum is going to be PoW. BitShares is DPoS , not PoS. Nxt is slowly dying and losing place to PoW and Debt based currencies.
There is no fundamental difference between DPoS and PoS. Regarding Ethereum, here is the latest news - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPsCGvXyrP4. It says that Ethereum will be PoS. DPOS makes the blockchain a lot more like a company than the wild west free-for-all of mining/forging that PoW/PoS entails. Block producers are not determined by the stake they own, they're determined by their reputation and trustworthiness in the community, and what they can offer in return for their block production (development, marketing, etc.). Like a mix between NXT and ripple if ripple labs was decentralized and run on the blockchain. DPOS has no justification to make that claim. DPOS sells votes to the highest bidder. In politics that's called FASCISM. Unless you have a way to positively identify your voter registration, you will never have a fair election. |
|
|
|
|
When Satoshi finished writing bitcoin and created the genesis block he created a legacy that grows with each miner added. Whomever creates a really cool PoS will have his code cloned and issued by someone with no interest in the coder. That coder will be forgotten because there is no hardware binding users to the genesis block. Why are VCs dumping so much money into work that will be stolen and changed to someone else's advantage?
|
|
|
|
This sounds like the majority of alt and clone coins nowadays. As long as you have a fancy name and slick graphics (and a lemming-esque userbase) you are golden.
One of several great things about 100% PoW is that it isn't ideal as a scam/ponzi/P&D coin because distribution is open to anyone doing the work, is expensive and any weak PoW currencies who don't capture the interest of the public with true innovation quickly get attacked because they don't have the mining hashrate to sustain against an aggressor. You can easily spot a scammy PoW coin by it having a extremely sharp rather than gradual distribution curve - I.E... Quark. Right. And by the same token PoS absolutely require fancy names like Monero, Ethereum, and Peercoin, and heavy marketing to succeed. Marketing a PoW like Doge gets notoriety, but the notion of actual work kills the romance. Ultimately, future PoS coins will be premined (or pre minted, or pre birthed or whatever) by whatever corporations can afford the best advertising. |
|
|
|
Are we expected to go down any more?
My fingers on the trigger, I want to buy but don't want to moss another dump.
I guess it's not you buying then. |
|
|
|
|
But please don't bore me with long explanations. Your PoS coin should be so good it practically sells itself.
|
|
|
|
|
Looky looky, someone is buying cheap coins.
|
|
|
|
You do realize Bitcoin is over a hundred times more valuable that any of it's competitors? Bitcoin is doing fine.
Maybe is overvalued and other altcoins are undervalued  Or maybe it's not. Who knows? Let's let the market decide, shall we? |
|
|
|
|
You do realize Bitcoin is over a hundred times more valuable that any of it's competitors? Bitcoin is doing fine.
|
|
|
|
This is mostly true and why I am a big fan of PoS coins. I think every Central Bank should have one.
Good boy. NB: Don't give up, man. You haven't used all your tricks yet. Try strawman tactics, for example.  You don't know what a strawman is. Let's just end this. You win. I will ignore you also. |
|
|
|
A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online
payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a
financial institution. Cash is currency by definition. What cash do you think the paper is written about? |
|
|
|
Try the title Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System yes creating an electronic payment method similar to the way cash works in the real world. Not a mention of currency though. There is no mention of your hypothesis in Satoshi's paper. Your interpretation is wrong. |
|
|
|
|
Taiwan is the Puerto Rico of China.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
