DECENTRALIZED crypto currency (including Bitcoin) is a delusion (any solutions?)

[Last of the V8s]

What doesn't hold up is Emin's reputation.

[1713555139]

1713555139

[1713555139]

1713555139

[1713555139]

1713555139

[ub27]

Crypto currencies, blockchain system, intelligent contract development, decentralized currencies do not lie. Block chain technology emerged as a response to world economic crises.

[freigeist]

Crypto currencies, blockchain system, intelligent contract development, decentralized currencies do not lie. Block chain technology emerged as a response to world economic crises.

That is true but it is becoming more or less the same shit that we already have only packed differently.
What is the point of this decentralized system when you have AML/KYC on every step and it starting to be regulated.
You are not allowed to spend your own money.
You have the masters above  that dictate how you should live your life.

This technology should help common people to interact directly make p2p direct deals without "trusted" 3rd party aka "MASTERS"
but as you can see most of the projects (ICO) are using this technology to  replicate the current existing system.
Also the problem is that they (ICO makes) make hype about this blockchain and try to use it in every aspect even where is not needed
just to grab money.

[Pilchard]

What doesn't hold up is Emins reputation.

They seem really enthusiastic about him being an advisor,  someone even said this in response to that last statement that Sky Guo said about having discussed the DDOS issue with Emin:  

"Man, how many people on Earth can say "I've discussed with Emin...". Team has an all star group of advisors"


What is the deal with Emin?  Why do some people think so highly of him,  and why doesn't his rep hold up?





And more importantly does Cypheriums POW+BFT with so called "anti DDOS" Tech hold up to scrutiny?


Ultimately it will centralize due to being a POW crypto,  but will the tech hold water until that eventuality?

[MadelynCohen]

PoS does not reinforce historical consensus. Every subsequent block in a PoW chain makes the history below it more secure because the cost of reversing it is superlinear in the number of blocks built on top. In PoS, this is not the case, the cost of producing a block is a constant, therefore the cost of reversing history is a constant

[deisik]

PoS does not reinforce historical consensus. Every subsequent block in a PoW chain makes the history below it more secure because the cost of reversing it is superlinear in the number of blocks built on top. In PoS, this is not the case, the cost of producing a block is a constant, therefore the cost of reversing history is a constant

But is it really so?

For the record, I'm not technically familiar with either PoW or PoS systems but let's assume that there is only one miner left in Bitcoin and he waits long enough till the difficulty drops. Won't he be able to do anything with the blockchain including reversing transactions? If he will, how does every subsequent block make the whole blockchain more secure then? As I understand it, he will be able to completely undo all transactions. What am I missing, in layman terms?

[sidhujag]

PoS does not reinforce historical consensus. Every subsequent block in a PoW chain makes the history below it more secure because the cost of reversing it is superlinear in the number of blocks built on top. In PoS, this is not the case, the cost of producing a block is a constant, therefore the cost of reversing history is a constant

The cost is offloaded proportionate to the cost of an attack in monetary terms. Its basically the same thing but the centralization of power is horizontally adjusted to bonded validators instead of miners.

[Bakemat]

Let's have a frank discussion about the technical realities of crypto-currency.

Apologies in advance to all those who have worked so hard on trying to advance crypto currency. I am not doing this to spite you. I don't want to waste more time. If we can convince ourselves we have a solution worth working on, then let's do it. Otherwise let's be honest with ourselves.


Edit: for those who want to jump straight to understanding how Iota's DAG works, click here and also here.

Upthread in my discussion with monsterer, I mentioned that I thought I could solve the problems Satoshi's Proof-of-Work by crediting all block solutions instead of the just the first one that arrives. When I went quiet on Jan 3, it was because I realized my design was faulty because there would still be an ambiguity around when the block solutions to be credited were propagated. I was trying to rush out a first iteration when while programming, I realized the detail that wasn't clear to me before.

I went off on several days of just thinking all day. I contemplated all the possible designs (including Iota's DAG, Lightning Networks, DPOS, Proof-of-Stake, Masternodes, Raiblocks/Blocklattice, etc), and I can't think of any design that uses a block chain or a DAG (or any other form of determining the longest chain of truth) which doesn't either centralize (factoring in society's ability to regulate the consistent partition) or diverge into inconsistent truths. Due to the CAP theorem it is fundamentally impossible for there to exist any block chain or consistent DAG design that won't centralize (even without regulation once you require scaling). Worse yet, it is impossible to attain any sort of end-to-end principled, decentralized scaling of transaction processing, because consistency is lost without centralization (even Proof-of-Work centralizes economically due to the Power Law distribution of capital).

The CAP theorem is fundamental. There will be no way to solve it. You all can spend the next 1000 years fooling yourself will all sorts of designs, but they will also end up either inconsistent or centralized or unable to scale. PERIOD. PERIOD.

I realized that Bitcoin and everything else so far is destined for failure. We are only mining each other here. We are not producing any fundamental breakthrough on the problem of decentralized electronic money. I do not like to work on things that I feel are misdirected and destined for failure in the end. I don't want to get rich by fooling other people (or fooling myself). All of you including the core Bitcoin developers are fooling themselves. I've been through all the designs. It is fundamental. There won't be any solution in any of the directions being pursued by any of the current and upcoming crypto projects. It is all delusional bullshit.

I felt rather hopeless about this, and so spent a few days thinking about other potential directions for my life, work, etc..

After all that, I decided the only way to get a breakthrough on electronic money is to admit the CAP theorem and decide which of the three, Consistency, Access, Partitioning to forsake in a design. Bitcoin can't tolerate any Partitioning, thus Access is and will be centrally controlled. Iota allows Partitioning and thus forsakes Consistency (watch it blow up).

Specifically Iota forsakes Consistency in a very chaotic way, where there can be multiple Partitions of truths and so no one will know which truth is valid. Or they will have to centralize to force a consistent truth.

[...]

Edit: the idea I proposed as a solution is also flawed.

I will be starting a new unmoderated thread to discuss in detail all the flaws in crypto currency.

So this can be explained well so that everyone can understand what they are investing in.

I'm confused.

One second you're stating you have the holy grails, the next you are starting a thread to point out there aren't any? :|

As you wrote, temporary chargebacks (inconsistent channels a.k.a. partitions) can be allowed and resolved with a proof-of-work scheme. Any other schemes you are contemplating won't work and I will tear them apart once you detail them.

They can not be resolved in a DAG scheme (e.g. Iota) without some centralized control.

Proof-of-work is centralized at 51% control. This encourages the nation-states to organize into cooperation on regulation of the internet in order to regain control over money. Governments and society will not give up this control and will instead decide to cooperate so the system described below can control to move us towards the 666 system which is rapidly taking form. Bitcoin is designed to drive us towards a world governance.

Centralized control is loss of permissionless principle. It means the government takes control (because the Power law distribution of capital always drives a collusion amongst government and big capital in a winner take all paradigm).

There is no POW required to secure a CL (channeled ledger), nor is it a block chain, or a DAG. Neither are there any charge backs in a CL design because the state of truth never gets to a point where you have to revert to them to resolve inconsistencies...which also means the risk of any centralization required to resolve said issues is next to nil, the network can always resolve itself.  

If block chains or DAGs or Ripple style ledgers could do what a CL allows, well, I wouldn't of wasted 3 years reinventing the wheel and tearing it apart myself and starting over.

The truth of each channel still has to be a consensus. It doesn't change the fundamental issues of how to prove consensus about double-spends within the partition. Even there are chosen nodes who are signatories for determining the truth of the channel, this then not permissionless because the government can attack those specific nodes.

Detail your design and I will rip it to shreds.

Not intending to be unfriendly, but I am tired of bullshit (especially bullshitting myself because I don't want to waste any programming effort). I have done all these designs in my head.

If there is a design that can improve upon Bitcoin, then I want to work on programming it. If not, then I want to not waste effort. It would be better for me to make some fast transaction addon for Bitcoin than to waste effort on designs that won't improve upon what is.

I don't think that the bitcoin decentralization is just a delusion because if there's one control it unlike fiat money the bitcoin is legal all over the world and the government not against it. We know that the government against it because the bitcoin is decentralize when the time bitcoin have an problem they don't know how to make solution because there's no one own it

[gcharang]

PoS does not reinforce historical consensus. Every subsequent block in a PoW chain makes the history below it more secure because the cost of reversing it is superlinear in the number of blocks built on top. In PoS, this is not the case, the cost of producing a block is a constant, therefore the cost of reversing history is a constant

But is it really so?

For the record, I'm not technically familiar with either PoW or PoS systems but let's assume that there is only one miner left in Bitcoin and he waits long enough till the difficulty drops. Won't he be able to do anything with the blockchain including reversing transactions? If he will, how does every subsequent block make the whole blockchain more secure then? As I understand it, he will be able to completely undo all transactions. What am I missing, in layman terms?

So when the rest of the network come back up they can just as easily disregard this fake chain (by the single Miner) and carry on with their own chain and be the main chain because the protocol recognizes the chain with the most work put in as the valid chain. And no matter how small/large the hashpower of the miner network is, even if they all collude they won't be able to touch funds from a public address whose private key they don't know. The only thing they can do is a double spend attack if they can consistently write their own blocks to the blockchain.

Also if only one miner is mining the coin it's already dead anyway, so the lone miner can do whatever they want and no one would care.

[gcharang]

Crypto currencies, blockchain system, intelligent contract development, decentralized currencies do not lie. Block chain technology emerged as a response to world economic crises.

That is true but it is becoming more or less the same shit that we already have only packed differently.
What is the point of this decentralized system when you have AML/KYC on every step and it starting to be regulated.
You are not allowed to spend your own money.
You have the masters above  that dictate how you should live your life.

This technology should help common people to interact directly make p2p direct deals without "trusted" 3rd party aka "MASTERS"
but as you can see most of the projects (ICO) are using this technology to  replicate the current existing system.
Also the problem is that they (ICO makes) make hype about this blockchain and try to use it in every aspect even where is not needed
just to grab money.

I think the BarterDEX (decentralized exchange) and Komodo platform's dICO technologies can help people to run true decentralized ICOs

[jbreher]

And no matter how small/large the hashpower of the miner network is, even if they all collude they won't be able to touch funds from a public address whose private key they don't know.

This used to be true. It is no longer true for segwit transactions. Any segwit transaction in a block that gets rolled back, should the miners agree to do so, becomes an anyonecanspend tx. Which would likely be claimed by whichever miner mines it back into a block.

[Zin-Zang]

PoS does not reinforce historical consensus. Every subsequent block in a PoW chain makes the history below it more secure because the cost of reversing it is superlinear in the number of blocks built on top. In PoS, this is not the case, the cost of producing a block is a constant, therefore the cost of reversing history is a constant

Sorry to tell you , that you are wrong, but you are wrong.  

In many proof of stake coins, you burn Coin Age when you stake, as unlike PoW ASICS which has constant access to try and find a block,
In proof of stake , when a block is generated, those coins become dormant for a length of time and can no longer affect block generation until a specific amount of time has passed and they build up enough age to stake again. (Varies with different implementations)

Also the cost of trying to reverse a Proof of stake history become more difficult with every block generated.
Because there is no way to maintain a dominant % when you are constantly losing a coin staking % & age every time you stake.

In Short , If I have 51% of a PoW mining operation, I can maintain control of that network constantly. (Like the Chinese with Bitcoin & Litecoin)

But in a PoS network, my 51% will be a constant flux with the rest of the network, meaning constant control of the PoS network is not possible.
Which is one reason PoS is superior to PoW, energy efficiently being the other.  

FYI:
If you purchased 51% of a PoS coin network, you drove the price of that coin sky high.  

[hv_]

PoS does not reinforce historical consensus. Every subsequent block in a PoW chain makes the history below it more secure because the cost of reversing it is superlinear in the number of blocks built on top. In PoS, this is not the case, the cost of producing a block is a constant, therefore the cost of reversing history is a constant

Sorry to tell you , that you are wrong, but you are wrong.  

In many proof of stake coins, you burn Coin Age when you stake, as unlike PoW ASICS which has constant access to try and find a block,
In proof of stake , when a block is generated, those coins become dormant for a length of time and can no longer affect block generation until a specific amount of time has passed and they build up enough age to stake again. (Varies with different implementations)

Also the cost of trying to reverse a Proof of stake history become more difficult with every block generated.
Because there is no way to maintain a dominant % when you are constantly losing a coin staking % & age every time you stake.

In Short , If I have 51% of a PoW mining operation, I can maintain control of that network constantly. (Like the Chinese with Bitcoin & Litecoin)

But in a PoS network, my 51% will be a constant flux with the rest of the network, meaning constant control of the PoS network is not possible.
Which is one reason PoS is superior to PoW, energy efficiently being the other.  

FYI:
If you purchased 51% of a PoS coin network, you drove the price of that coin sky high.  

if you once sit on your 51% Pos of Shit - there are no externalities (operational risks) that will change this in any future and you will be king for ever. This centralization is than for EVER.

In a PoW system you have by far moar skin in the game and that makes a PoW moar secure by far - since you have a latent / permanent decentralization pressure (by far higher than in a PoS by the in PoS absent op risks) at work ALL THE TIME

Have you ever heard about entropy and energy?


Simple example:  PoS is like buying ONCE a cool firewall system - and than never care about it later / ever ...

[Zin-Zang]

if you once sit on your 51% Pos of Shit - there are no externalities (operational risks) that will change this in any future and you will be king for ever. This centralization is than for EVER.

In a PoW system you have by far moar skin in the game and that makes a PoW moar secure by far - since you have a latent / permanent decentralization pressure (by far higher than in a PoS by the in PoS absent op risks) at work ALL THE TIME

Have you ever heard about entropy and energy?


Simple example:  PoS is like buying ONCE a cool firewall system - and than never care about it later / ever ...

Man  , you are a crybaby.  

Control of PoW always centralizes to the rich.
Or would you like to share the location and number of warehouses you personally own that mine your bitcoin cash.
Those Chinese miners can block your transactions any time they like for an indefinite period. (That is centralization!)

PoW is a dying system that is doomed to run off a cliff, keep putting your money into it.  

In regards to your attempt about PoS externals.
Only badly designed PoS with high inflation can you maintain permanent high % by staking only and never selling your principle.

However take for instant zeitcoin, it runs on Proof of Stake and it makes less than 500 coins per day.
In their coin PoS is used as a consensus method and not as an insane free coin generator.

You have to sell your principle amount to earn any fiat , therefore lowering your future staking %.
So in other words, when you sell some of it you change your staking % or you have to buy more to have a higher staking %.

The other PoS advantage of energy efficiently will in the end , kill off all PoW coins,
unless they follow Eth and switch to a PoS consensus that is sustainable.

FYI:
That line under your avatar is ironic.
Remove The Middlemen
Sadly you fail to grasp the ASIC Miners are the middlemen and they determine if your transactions make it into a block or not.
Since no one can maintain over 51% control over a PoS network for an indefinite amount of time like one can with a PoW network,
your transactions on a well designed PoS network can never be denied for long. 

[jakiro.hovard]

One of the important features of the crypto-currency is decentralization. I think that you do not need to talk about what it is, since you are here. Therefore, decentralized exchanges are a good solution for the crypto industry

[hv_]

if you once sit on your 51% Pos of Shit - there are no externalities (operational risks) that will change this in any future and you will be king for ever. This centralization is than for EVER.

In a PoW system you have by far moar skin in the game and that makes a PoW moar secure by far - since you have a latent / permanent decentralization pressure (by far higher than in a PoS by the in PoS absent op risks) at work ALL THE TIME

Have you ever heard about entropy and energy?


Simple example:  PoS is like buying ONCE a cool firewall system - and than never care about it later / ever ...

Man  , you are a crybaby.  

Control of PoW always centralizes to the rich.
Or would you like to share the location and number of warehouses you personally own that mine your bitcoin cash.
Those Chinese miners can block your transactions any time they like for an indefinite period. (That is centralization!)

PoW is a dying system that is doomed to run off a cliff, keep putting your money into it.  

In regards to your attempt about PoS externals.
Only badly designed PoS with high inflation can you maintain permanent high % by staking only and never selling your principle.

However take for instant zeitcoin, it runs on Proof of Stake and it makes less than 500 coins per day.
In their coin PoS is used as a consensus method and not as an insane free coin generator.

You have to sell your principle amount to earn any fiat , therefore lowering your future staking %.
So in other words, when you sell some of it you change your staking % or you have to buy more to have a higher staking %.

The other PoS advantage of energy efficiently will in the end , kill off all PoW coins,
unless they follow Eth and switch to a PoS consensus that is sustainable.

FYI:
That line under your avatar is ironic.
Remove The Middlemen
Sadly you fail to grasp the ASIC Miners are the middlemen and they determine if your transactions make it into a block or not.
Since no one can maintain over 51% control over a PoS network for an indefinite amount of time like one can with a PoW network,
your transactions on a well designed PoS network can never be denied for long.  

Nope - your PoS moguls are the Middle Men - forever -

Get your time frame and all risks  right and you'll understand it.

What you 'try' to do with your 'right' PoS is just to create this complex firewall ONCE - no other external work is spend to this after - good luck investing in such a Proof of Shit.

[Zin-Zang]

if you once sit on your 51% Pos of Shit - there are no externalities (operational risks) that will change this in any future and you will be king for ever. This centralization is than for EVER.

In a PoW system you have by far moar skin in the game and that makes a PoW moar secure by far - since you have a latent / permanent decentralization pressure (by far higher than in a PoS by the in PoS absent op risks) at work ALL THE TIME

Have you ever heard about entropy and energy?


Simple example:  PoS is like buying ONCE a cool firewall system - and than never care about it later / ever ...

Man  , you are a crybaby.  

Control of PoW always centralizes to the rich.
Or would you like to share the location and number of warehouses you personally own that mine your bitcoin cash.
Those Chinese miners can block your transactions any time they like for an indefinite period. (That is centralization!)

PoW is a dying system that is doomed to run off a cliff, keep putting your money into it.  

In regards to your attempt about PoS externals.
Only badly designed PoS with high inflation can you maintain permanent high % by staking only and never selling your principle.

However take for instant zeitcoin, it runs on Proof of Stake and it makes less than 500 coins per day.
In their coin PoS is used as a consensus method and not as an insane free coin generator.

You have to sell your principle amount to earn any fiat , therefore lowering your future staking %.
So in other words, when you sell some of it you change your staking % or you have to buy more to have a higher staking %.

The other PoS advantage of energy efficiently will in the end , kill off all PoW coins,
unless they follow Eth and switch to a PoS consensus that is sustainable.

FYI:
That line under your avatar is ironic.
Remove The Middlemen
Sadly you fail to grasp the ASIC Miners are the middlemen and they determine if your transactions make it into a block or not.
Since no one can maintain over 51% control over a PoS network for an indefinite amount of time like one can with a PoW network,
your transactions on a well designed PoS network can never be denied for long.  

Nope - your PoS moguls are the Middle Men - forever -

Get your time frame and all risks  right and you'll understand it.

What you 'try' to do with your 'right' PoS is just to create this complex firewall ONCE - no other external work is spend to this after - good luck investing in such a Proof of Shit.

Enjoy your PoW Delusions in time it will mean Proven overly Worthless !    

[hv_]

if you once sit on your 51% Pos of Shit - there are no externalities (operational risks) that will change this in any future and you will be king for ever. This centralization is than for EVER.

In a PoW system you have by far moar skin in the game and that makes a PoW moar secure by far - since you have a latent / permanent decentralization pressure (by far higher than in a PoS by the in PoS absent op risks) at work ALL THE TIME

Have you ever heard about entropy and energy?


Simple example:  PoS is like buying ONCE a cool firewall system - and than never care about it later / ever ...

Man  , you are a crybaby.  

Control of PoW always centralizes to the rich.
Or would you like to share the location and number of warehouses you personally own that mine your bitcoin cash.
Those Chinese miners can block your transactions any time they like for an indefinite period. (That is centralization!)

PoW is a dying system that is doomed to run off a cliff, keep putting your money into it.  

In regards to your attempt about PoS externals.
Only badly designed PoS with high inflation can you maintain permanent high % by staking only and never selling your principle.

However take for instant zeitcoin, it runs on Proof of Stake and it makes less than 500 coins per day.
In their coin PoS is used as a consensus method and not as an insane free coin generator.

You have to sell your principle amount to earn any fiat , therefore lowering your future staking %.
So in other words, when you sell some of it you change your staking % or you have to buy more to have a higher staking %.

The other PoS advantage of energy efficiently will in the end , kill off all PoW coins,
unless they follow Eth and switch to a PoS consensus that is sustainable.

FYI:
That line under your avatar is ironic.
Remove The Middlemen
Sadly you fail to grasp the ASIC Miners are the middlemen and they determine if your transactions make it into a block or not.
Since no one can maintain over 51% control over a PoS network for an indefinite amount of time like one can with a PoW network,
your transactions on a well designed PoS network can never be denied for long.  

Nope - your PoS moguls are the Middle Men - forever -

Get your time frame and all risks  right and you'll understand it.

What you 'try' to do with your 'right' PoS is just to create this complex firewall ONCE - no other external work is spend to this after - good luck investing in such a Proof of Shit.

Enjoy your PoW Delusions in time it will mean Proven overly Worthless !    

The open markets will decide all that for us - and PoW has biggest share by far - still

[Zin-Zang]

if you once sit on your 51% Pos of Shit - there are no externalities (operational risks) that will change this in any future and you will be king for ever. This centralization is than for EVER.

In a PoW system you have by far moar skin in the game and that makes a PoW moar secure by far - since you have a latent / permanent decentralization pressure (by far higher than in a PoS by the in PoS absent op risks) at work ALL THE TIME

Have you ever heard about entropy and energy?


Simple example:  PoS is like buying ONCE a cool firewall system - and than never care about it later / ever ...

Man  , you are a crybaby.  

Control of PoW always centralizes to the rich.
Or would you like to share the location and number of warehouses you personally own that mine your bitcoin cash.
Those Chinese miners can block your transactions any time they like for an indefinite period. (That is centralization!)

PoW is a dying system that is doomed to run off a cliff, keep putting your money into it.  

In regards to your attempt about PoS externals.
Only badly designed PoS with high inflation can you maintain permanent high % by staking only and never selling your principle.

However take for instant zeitcoin, it runs on Proof of Stake and it makes less than 500 coins per day.
In their coin PoS is used as a consensus method and not as an insane free coin generator.

You have to sell your principle amount to earn any fiat , therefore lowering your future staking %.
So in other words, when you sell some of it you change your staking % or you have to buy more to have a higher staking %.

The other PoS advantage of energy efficiently will in the end , kill off all PoW coins,
unless they follow Eth and switch to a PoS consensus that is sustainable.

FYI:
That line under your avatar is ironic.
Remove The Middlemen
Sadly you fail to grasp the ASIC Miners are the middlemen and they determine if your transactions make it into a block or not.
Since no one can maintain over 51% control over a PoS network for an indefinite amount of time like one can with a PoW network,
your transactions on a well designed PoS network can never be denied for long.  

Nope - your PoS moguls are the Middle Men - forever -

Get your time frame and all risks  right and you'll understand it.

What you 'try' to do with your 'right' PoS is just to create this complex firewall ONCE - no other external work is spend to this after - good luck investing in such a Proof of Shit.

Enjoy your PoW Delusions in time it will mean Proven overly Worthless !    

The open markets will decide all that for us - and PoW has biggest share by far - still

Which is why you are going to lose the most money by ignoring PoW flawed design.   

[sidhujag]

if you once sit on your 51% Pos of Shit - there are no externalities (operational risks) that will change this in any future and you will be king for ever. This centralization is than for EVER.

In a PoW system you have by far moar skin in the game and that makes a PoW moar secure by far - since you have a latent / permanent decentralization pressure (by far higher than in a PoS by the in PoS absent op risks) at work ALL THE TIME

Have you ever heard about entropy and energy?


Simple example:  PoS is like buying ONCE a cool firewall system - and than never care about it later / ever ...

Man  , you are a crybaby.  

Control of PoW always centralizes to the rich.
Or would you like to share the location and number of warehouses you personally own that mine your bitcoin cash.
Those Chinese miners can block your transactions any time they like for an indefinite period. (That is centralization!)

PoW is a dying system that is doomed to run off a cliff, keep putting your money into it.  

In regards to your attempt about PoS externals.
Only badly designed PoS with high inflation can you maintain permanent high % by staking only and never selling your principle.

However take for instant zeitcoin, it runs on Proof of Stake and it makes less than 500 coins per day.
In their coin PoS is used as a consensus method and not as an insane free coin generator.

You have to sell your principle amount to earn any fiat , therefore lowering your future staking %.
So in other words, when you sell some of it you change your staking % or you have to buy more to have a higher staking %.

The other PoS advantage of energy efficiently will in the end , kill off all PoW coins,
unless they follow Eth and switch to a PoS consensus that is sustainable.

FYI:
That line under your avatar is ironic.
Remove The Middlemen
Sadly you fail to grasp the ASIC Miners are the middlemen and they determine if your transactions make it into a block or not.
Since no one can maintain over 51% control over a PoS network for an indefinite amount of time like one can with a PoW network,
your transactions on a well designed PoS network can never be denied for long.  

Pow will always be cheaper than pos trust me. Now for optimal CAP theorem attributes which cater to enterprise apps you may want to sacrifice some security for utility by doing a hybrid pow/pos with a layer 2. I will leave that as an exercise for you.