Bitcoin Forum
November 29, 2022, 08:10:19 AM *
News: Reminder: do not keep your money in online accounts
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: PoS vs PoW  (Read 4374 times)
monsterer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008
Merit: 1000


View Profile
September 10, 2015, 08:56:07 AM
 #61

Do you mind expending your explanation? This is very interesting topic to me.
Are you trying to say that his claims that he solved NaS problem permanently are not right?

If producing a block has no cost, then neither does attacking the chain - that is the key problem with POS, and is the thing which causes NaS to exist in the first place. Just fixing NaS doesn't address the key problem. It's like sticking another bandaid on a broken system, IMO.
There are several different types of Bitcoin clients. The most secure are full nodes like Bitcoin Core, which will follow the rules of the network no matter what miners do. Even if every miner decided to create 1000 bitcoins per block, full nodes would stick to the rules and reject those blocks.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1669709419
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1669709419

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1669709419
Reply with quote  #2

1669709419
Report to moderator
1669709419
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1669709419

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1669709419
Reply with quote  #2

1669709419
Report to moderator
Mickeyb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798
Merit: 1000

Move On !!!!!!


View Profile
September 10, 2015, 09:00:35 AM
 #62

Do you mind expending your explanation? This is very interesting topic to me.
Are you trying to say that his claims that he solved NaS problem permanently are not right?

If producing a block has no cost, then neither does attacking the chain - that is the key problem with POS, and is the thing which causes NaS to exist in the first place. Just fixing NaS doesn't address the key problem. It's like sticking another bandaid on a broken system, IMO.

OK, then after you, all POS coins are doomed and only POW has future, since it needs to be expensive to validate block in order to be secure.

I don't know have you had an opportunity to read this explanation, but Vitalik claims that you are not right.

https://blog.ethereum.org/2014/11/25/proof-stake-learned-love-weak-subjectivity/

I am not an expert, and correct me if I am wrong please.

Thanks!
monsterer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008
Merit: 1000


View Profile
September 10, 2015, 09:15:48 AM
 #63

OK, then after you, all POS coins are doomed and only POW has future, since it needs to be expensive to validate block in order to be secure.

It needs to be expensive to produce a block, not to validate one.
jl777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1104


View Profile WWW
September 10, 2015, 09:26:35 AM
 #64

Vitalik claims that he has solved this Nothing at Stake problem!!
What are your thoughts about this?
Thanks!

Unless you expend some limited resource when producing a block, you have not addressed the key problem with POS.
would you consider BTC a limited resource?
it is the BTC that is the resource needed to buy the stake that creates the PoS blocks.

In a sense, PoS could not exist before PoW.

http://www.digitalcatallaxy.com/report2015.html
100+ page annual report for SuperNET
LiQio
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1181
Merit: 1002



View Profile
September 10, 2015, 09:33:13 AM
 #65

OK, then after you, all POS coins are doomed and only POW has future, since it needs to be expensive to validate block in order to be secure.

It needs to be expensive to produce a block, not to validate one.

What if producing a block is expensive due to opportunity costs (implicit costs are also "expensive", right)?
monsterer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008
Merit: 1000


View Profile
September 10, 2015, 09:35:10 AM
 #66

would you consider BTC a limited resource?
it is the BTC that is the resource needed to buy the stake that creates the PoS blocks.

In a sense, PoS could not exist before PoW.

You buy BTC/NXT/BLAH to acquire your stake, yes... But producing a block after you own the stake costs nothing.
monsterer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008
Merit: 1000


View Profile
September 10, 2015, 09:36:56 AM
 #67

What if producing a block is expensive due to opportunity costs (implicit costs are also "expensive", right)?

Can you give an example?
LiQio
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1181
Merit: 1002



View Profile
September 10, 2015, 09:59:06 AM
 #68

What if producing a block is expensive due to opportunity costs (implicit costs are also "expensive", right)?

Can you give an example?

E.g. your investment losing value
Mickeyb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798
Merit: 1000

Move On !!!!!!


View Profile
September 10, 2015, 10:07:52 AM
 #69

OK, then after you, all POS coins are doomed and only POW has future, since it needs to be expensive to validate block in order to be secure.

It needs to be expensive to produce a block, not to validate one.

OK my bad, to produce a block, not to validate. You still haven't answered my question though. Are all POS devs wrong then, even Vitalik even though he claims that he has solved a NaS problem. Will he then be putting his whole Ethereum project, that got 18 millions of investment  in danger, when he's implementing POS? I mean, can he be that wrong?

Not just him, but the NXT devs, all devs of the POS coins. I took Ethereum example, since the people have trusted them with 18 millions, nevertheless.
jl777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1104


View Profile WWW
September 10, 2015, 10:31:43 AM
 #70

would you consider BTC a limited resource?
it is the BTC that is the resource needed to buy the stake that creates the PoS blocks.

In a sense, PoS could not exist before PoW.

You buy BTC/NXT/BLAH to acquire your stake, yes... But producing a block after you own the stake costs nothing.
It seems you are fixated on "producing a block after you own the stake costs nothing"

Why cant the same logic be used for "producing a block after you own the mining gear costs nothing"?

I dont understand why it is such an important thing where you draw the line of incurring costs. Regardless of when the cost is incurred, it is  still a cost.

So the one advantage PoW has over PoS is that once PoS is 51% attacked, then it cant escape, while a PoW being 51% attacked is a temporary problem.

OK, so if somebody buys up half a PoS coin, then he can create whatever blocks he wants from then onward without any incremental cost. However, who in their right mind would spend multiples of marketcap, just so they can create new blocks without cost?

You seem to ignore the PoS characteristic of getting people who have more of it being more vested in it and less likely to attack it.

To put in perspective, if BTC was a PoS coin, it would probably take billions to get to a controlling stake. And for all that cost, it is not clear that even millions could be made and if any sort of attack is made from the controlling stake, the value will drop far in excess of any gains from an attack.

So I will give to you the point that once a PoS is controlled, it will be a permanent thing and PoW has an advantage here. However, I do not see it as any practical problem as it does not make economic sense to conduct such a financial attack

http://www.digitalcatallaxy.com/report2015.html
100+ page annual report for SuperNET
monsterer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008
Merit: 1000


View Profile
September 10, 2015, 10:37:59 AM
 #71

It seems you are fixated on "producing a block after you own the stake costs nothing"

Why cant the same logic be used for "producing a block after you own the mining gear costs nothing"?

Because its not true? After you purchase all the mining gear, producing a block costs the entire network 25 BTC. So if you want to double spend, you have to outpace the network producing blocks, which is very expensive.

Quote
Regardless of when the cost is incurred, it is  still a cost.

If I give you a loan which has a handling fee of X and an daily interest rate of Y, this is a very different cost model to a loan with just a handling fee. So, a cost is not equal to a cost. Same thing applies here.

Quote
OK, so if somebody buys up half a PoS coin, then he can create whatever blocks he wants from then onward without any incremental cost. However, who in their right mind would spend multiples of marketcap, just so they can create new blocks without cost?

You don't need to buy a majority stake in a POS coin - every bit of stake you own gives you constant probability of producing a block, and therefore a double spend. The more stake, the higher that constant value is.
CryptInvest
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2156
Merit: 1132


View Profile
September 10, 2015, 10:49:06 AM
 #72

In my opinion, a POS is just eco-friendly emulation POW. In the case of real need to spend a hacker could double spending in both systems, but it is too costly to be justified.
amaclin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1019


View Profile
September 10, 2015, 11:09:58 AM
 #73

In my opinion, a POS is just eco-friendly emulation POW.
PoS is emulation of modern fiat currencies.
People who has majority of funds can dictate everything and make any changes in the "algorithms".
menoiazei (OP)
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 368
Merit: 24


View Profile
September 10, 2015, 06:18:22 PM
 #74

so my understanding and correct me if wrong
Proof of work performance has to do with the mining hardware one got
 and with proof of stake the more coins you hold the more you can produce???

what i don't really understand is how you actually generate coins with proof of stake...based on what???

Cause is not before and effect is not after
monsterer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008
Merit: 1000


View Profile
September 10, 2015, 09:27:12 PM
 #75

what i don't really understand is how you actually generate coins with proof of stake...based on what???

Coins come from recycled transaction fees, and your chance to generate a block is proportional to the stake you owned at a given time.
vanillagalaxy
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 179
Merit: 100


View Profile
September 11, 2015, 11:37:44 AM
 #76

all the china pool's hashrate sums up already far more than 51%...so..for those who said how POW so good so better so best blablabla..you guys should give up bitcoin now.
dreamax25
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 370
Merit: 103


View Profile
December 12, 2018, 12:54:50 PM
 #77

Vitalik Buterin explains the difference between PoS and PoW.

https://coincodex.tv/videos/496/vitalik-buterin-explains-the-difference-between-proof-of-stake-and-proof-of-work
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!