Is PoS the future of Bitcoin mining?

[inBitweTrust]

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

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

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.

[BitUsher]

The future of mining may be introduced by 21 Inc-

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

[shulio]

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.

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

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?

This, we can't even get the community on board with a no brainer. If you think that you could get it passed go for it, the code is open source, make it work and try to get it to go. You might even get a few people who will jump over to BTC-POS but it would just be another alt coin.

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 could solve some problems, like the problem of current miners crying for more fiat as income.

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

[crazyivan]

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.

[Elwar]

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

[Lauda]

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.

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.

[jonald_fyookball]

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?

[shulio]

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.

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

[NeuroticFish]

Changing to PoS could solve some problems, like the problem of current miners crying for more fiat as income.

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

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.

[shulio]

Changing to PoS could solve some problems, like the problem of current miners crying for more fiat as income.

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

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

[NeuroticFish]

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.

[crazyivan]

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.

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

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.

[Troonetpt]

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.

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

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.

[crazyivan]

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.

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

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.

[shulio]

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.

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

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.

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

[Q7]

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.

[Lauda]

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.

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.

[jonald_fyookball]

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.

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.

[crazyivan]

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.

[jonald_fyookball]

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"?