What is your opinion on PoS coins?

[kiklo]

In PoS the rich gets richer and it incentivizes people to hold a lot of coins because then they earn more that way causing some centralization. I don't think coins should be held, they should be used.

And when you realize that in crypto pretty much every coin can easily jump 10-20% up or down in value within just a single day, holding coins just for a couple of percentages a year I think is crazy.

Maybe if a coin that would be successfully pegged to something might be worth it to safely stake.

The Fact they consider the Coin has Value is one reason to hold it.
No different than LTC miners not selling every single litecoin, waiting for a better price.

Here is the difference,
when the Proof of Stake guy sells his stake, he decreases his future ability to make more coins, so he will not keep getting richer, in fact if he keeps all of his coins forever and never sells, he raised the price for everyone else but never got anything in return.
Most of the time , Fast Cars & even Faster Women, will get the guy to give up PoS mining (Harvest) capacity.  

But the LTC miner can give up every single coin and it does not affect his ASICs ability to make more.
If the LTC Price stayed the same, the PoW miner would be richer, but PoW or PoS both are controlled by the economic laws of supply and demand.
So massive supply decreases demand and lowers the price until demand catches back up.
But we also know PoW ASICS output decrease every 2 weeks, but the ASICS upgrade costs and electricity costs , will always make PoW a losing proposition within a year.

   

[GoingAlt]

PoS is not as decentralized as PoW, but decentralization is not as important as it used to be.

[kiklo]

PoS is not as decentralized as PoW, but decentralization is not as important as it used to be.

Really, what logic supports your statement?


 

FYI:
decentralization is not as important as it used to be
It is : if Single Point of Failure is a Concern , which with any system you want running 24x7, it is most definitely a Concern!

[GoingAlt]

PoS is not as decentralized as PoW, but decentralization is not as important as it used to be.

Really, what logic supports your statement?


 

FYI:
decentralization is not as important as it used to be
It is : if Single Point of Failure is a Concern , which with any system you want running 24x7, it is most definitely is a Concern!

Well, when the first cryptocoin was setup, it had to be decentralized, because it could have easily been shut down if not.

Now . . . why bother to shut down a crypto currency, because all the users easily switch to another. As long as 1 decentralized currency remains, it's not so important for others to be decentrailzed too.

[kiklo]

Well, when the first cryptocoin was setup, it had to be decentralized, because it could have easily been shut down if not.

Now . . . why bother to shut down a crypto currency, because all the users easily switch to another. As long as 1 decentralized currency remains, it's not so important for others to be decentrailzed too.

 

LMFAO!!! , you're killing me with that one.

It matters if you don't want all of the Fiat you invested to go up in smoke.   

Good One!!!!


 

[GoingAlt]

Decentralization is certainly a desireable property. You just don't have the same risk of a government shutdown that you did 7 years ago, so it is not as important as it used to be.

[trenchflaint]

PoS really have a disadvantage as it will give a lot of coins to the one who has the most % in the weight of the network.
Who knows maybe the developer of the coin is also using PoS as he as many premine coins.

[kiklo]

Decentralization is certainly a desireable property. You just don't have the same risk of a government shutdown that you did 7 years ago, so it is not as important as it used to be.

There is no way for you to know that.  


Decentralization is certainly a desirable property

No it is a requirement you also have script kiddies, that will DDOS you and kill your investment.
I think you are missing the point the coin which you invested Fiat in dies due to outside forces because it is centarlized and you will lose all of your time and money invested in it.

 

[kiklo]

PoS really have a disadvantage as it will give a lot of coins to the one who has the most % in the weight of the network.
Who knows maybe the developer of the coin is also using PoS as he as many premine coins.

If you are premining a coin , you getting the coins for nothing anyway , PoW or PoS makes no difference.

 


FYI:
Ethereum is PoW right, did not the guy just premine it and then sell it.  
Ripple too.

Ethereum Premine 12M ETH (17% of current supply) :  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1147063.0

Ripple Premine was 100% :
When the Ripple network was created, 100 billion XRP was created.
Only 100 billion XRPs can ever exist
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=146964.0


FYI2:
Simple fix only buy coins with no premine.  

FYI3:
PoS is currently the best way to be in crypto, less costs to operate, price can stay the same and you still make money by only selling your stakes, optional: whether you run it 24x7 to get compounded interest or just a day or 2 out of the month to earn a quick stake, your Choice.  

[spartak_t]

Guys,

So far nobody mentioned some major (security) flaw in PoS coins. If you create enough demand on a PoS coin, nobody will care about people with larger wallets. Let's face it - most of the people are with weak hands. Example: There is a cryptocurrency with 20M in supply, 1-2% yearly interest and a guy who invested 5-10 BTC to buy 25-50% of the entire currency @ the price of ~50-100 satoshi. If that currency becomes viral, then the price may be 1k satoshi or even 100k. Do you think this guy will hold all of his coins? He will most likely sell them, when he sees x5 - x10 profit. Then you have another guy who bought the coins of the first guy, but the price is now 500-1000 satoshi and he invested 25-50 BTC. The currency becomes even more viral and the price is now 5k satoshi. Second guy sells half of his coins with profit and holds the rest. After some time, price is now 10-15k satoshi. Second guy is out and there is a 3rd guy (whale), but with less % of the currency. I think you guys get my idea. Most of the people are here for the fiat money they can earn and they don't care about the technology and about how cryptocurrencies may be used in the real world. If you manage to make a cryptocurrency viral (were 10s and even 100s of thousands people are using it), then you will not worry about N@S problems and such, because at this point, there will be not 100-500 wallets, but 10s of thousands. You still can buy bigger % of the currency, but at this point you will need millions of $ for that. That's something, which only serious investor can do and serious investors are not f*cking with their investments.

[freshman777]

Guys,

So far nobody mentioned some major (security) flaw in PoS coins.

Because the security flaws of PoS are not more serious than these in PoW coins but the truth must be kept secret. Check this FUD attempt at PoS. I like how user nexern weighed in there with very simple but undeniable logic

to follow your crude 'pico-probabillity-attack-vectors' on pos, here is a crude pow one for you. just imagine that
for whatever reason, the power-lines to the three chinese mining-warehouses randomly gets broken. i guess in this
case the attack would be much cheaper, perhaps close to free compared to pos and as said, just out of the dark
without any chance or sign to prevent it. this is impossible with pos.

it's all about probabilities. N@S attack probability and odds of success? Cutting power lines to the three chinese mining-warehouses probability and odds of success? A sober analysis concludes the potential flaw of PoS is at least not more serious than the vulnerabilities of PoW mining centralization. Own both PoW and PoS, don't be an irrational supremacist.

[alyssa85]

Guys,

So far nobody mentioned some major (security) flaw in PoS coins. If you create enough demand on a PoS coin, nobody will care about people with larger wallets. Let's face it - most of the people are with weak hands. Example: There is a cryptocurrency with 20M in supply, 1-2% yearly interest and a guy who invested 5-10 BTC to buy 25-50% of the entire currency @ the price of ~50-100 satoshi. If that currency becomes viral, then the price may be 1k satoshi or even 100k. Do you think this guy will hold all of his coins? He will most likely sell them, when he sees x5 - x10 profit. Then you have another guy who bought the coins of the first guy, but the price is now 500-1000 satoshi and he invested 25-50 BTC. The currency becomes even more viral and the price is now 5k satoshi. Second guy sells half of his coins with profit and holds the rest. After some time, price is now 10-15k satoshi. Second guy is out and there is a 3rd guy (whale), but with less % of the currency. I think you guys get my idea. Most of the people are here for the fiat money they can earn and they don't care about the technology and about how cryptocurrencies may be used in the real world. If you manage to make a cryptocurrency viral (were 10s and even 100s of thousands people are using it), then you will not worry about N@S problems and such, because at this point, there will be not 100-500 wallets, but 10s of thousands. You still can buy bigger % of the currency, but at this point you will need millions of $ for that. That's something, which only serious investor can do and serious investors are not f*cking with their investments.

But every time the coins are sold the number of wallets doing the staking increases. The more wallets staking, the safer the network.

There is no incentive to run a full node in BTC because you have a cost but no reward. But there is plenty of reward for PoS holders.

As far as I can tell, the only PoS coin that has gone wrong is Clams - so much is held by JustDice, who stake them, that the difficulty has gone through the roof and it's pointless any one else staking. But those types of flaws are easy to solve with some velocity in the coin, or limiting the ageing required to stake.