[SHOCK] Core dev and Blockstream employee tells bitcoin users to use fiat!

[franky1]

i think alot of people are missing the point of the chain work security of PoW and are only fighting for PoS purely for a basement dweller dream of being rich from using one laptop.

sorry guys but no matter what feasible method you can come up with to try to bring it back down to basement dweller each user wins.... will within weeks be so-opted/corrupted so that big guns grab the best 'luck' 'chance'.

the reason why no one is doing so already with PoS is because 99% of PoS coins ar crapcoins so there is no motivation for people to game the system even if there are many known 'attack vectors' to do it


if you brush aside the financial sharing... and look at the technicals of network security of the immutable data.
the security of PoW 'chainwork' is more secure than PoS.

the only argument for PoS seems to be around 'sharing' the pie of reward.. which as i say.. give it a few weeks of any coin that has good value.. would get co-opted in weeks..

even 'realbitcoin' admits as much by how NXT forms 'pools'

[mindphuq]

i think alot of people are missing the point of the chain work security of PoW

Sorry mate, you been the one who didn't understand how PoS works, and you want to teach us about security concepts in PoS and PoW?

[RealBitcoin]

i think alot of people are missing the point of the chain work security of PoW and are only fighting for PoS purely for a basement dweller dream of being rich from using one laptop.

sorry guys but no matter what feasible method you can come up with to try to bring it back down to basement dweller each user wins.... will within weeks be so-opted/corrupted so that big guns grab the best 'luck' 'chance'.

the reason why no one is doing so already with PoS is because 99% of PoS coins ar crapcoins so there is no motivation for people to game the system even if there are many know 'attack vectors' to do it


if you brush aside the financial sharing... and look at the technicals of network secrity of the immutible data.
the security of PoW 'chainwork' is more secure than PoS.

the only argument for PoS seems to be around 'sharing' the pie of reward.. which as i say.. give it a few weeks of any coin that has good value.. would get co-opted in weeks..

even 'realbitcoin' admits as much by how NXT forms 'pools'

I am not denying that most of the PoS coins are crap, what I am saying is that the PoS model is better.

You have security through cryptography, the only vulnerability is Sybil, which can only be defeated by shareholder voting.

If you own 80% of the thing, then voting by yourself is not a Sybil attack, because you own the damn thing.

You can only have Sybil attack if you let others to vote for your on behalf of you, and then they pump up their actual power by using fake nodes.

And that can also be solved with some kind of escrow of some other solution, like having the node open sourced or whatever.

The point is that POS is better than POW.

[franky1]

i think alot of people are missing the point of the chain work security of PoW

Sorry mate, you been the one who didn't understand how PoS works, and you want to teach us about security concepts in PoS and PoW?

ive been around since 2012.

i have seen many many varients of the PoS methodology (yep there are more than 1) and each of them can be abused by those with certain resources.

so if your motivation is the hope of a payday by you being random person x of 10,000 hoping that within 10,000 blocks you'll get lucky once.. guess what

you will find on any 'successful' coin that would use PoS would have everyone else with atleast 1000 chances and they are getting their income every 10th block

.. but putting the income share/moral argument aside..

the security of PoS vs chainwork........ chainwork wins

[chek2fire]

Because i see here many ppl that like a coffee money can i ask a question?
Has anyone of you buy a coffee in his life with gold?

[franky1]

Because i see here many ppl that like a coffee money can i ask a question?
Has anyone of you buy a coffee in his life with gold?

yes i have... being serious, i have (hint nasdaq)

but you comparing bitcoin to gold is just mis-understanding bitcoins benefits to gold. and why gold on its own has its own unique benefits.
if you take away bitcoins utility of being spendable. and just turn it into a reserve.. it becomes no better than 42coin

gold survives without the 'spending as currency' utility because it has other unique features (industrial, fashion)
bitcoin without the 'spending as currency' utility, doesnt have any other real unique features.. so as i said, ends up just like 42coin

[chek2fire]

Because i see here many ppl that like a coffee money can i ask a question?
Has anyone of you buy a coffee in his life with gold?

yes i have.

but you comparing bitcoin to gold is just mis-understanding bitcoins benefits to gold. and why gold on its own has its own unique benefits.
if you take away bitcoins utility of being spendable. and just turn it into a reserve.. it becomes no better than 42coin

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

ok i am done here.
Have a nice day
 

[Bit_Happy]

You wake up. U don't have computer knowledge enough to see that Bitcoin is better suited as store of value than cash.
It CAN'T scale well enough while keeping it secure and decentralised. So digital gold with lighting network extension is a way to go.

"Digital gold" or iron pyrite (fool's gold), which direction do we go when Bitcoin is no longer usable as 'cash'?
Is the "value being stored" greatly reduced when most merchants are not able to accept it anymore?

[Decentradical]

i have seen many many varients of the PoS methodology (yep there are more than 1) and each of them can be abused by those with certain resources.

The raspberry pi farm wasn't very adequate. What would be the most realistic example of such abuse?

[franky1]

i have seen many many varients of the PoS methodology (yep there are more than 1) and each of them can be abused by those with certain resources.

The raspberry pi farm wasn't very adequate. What would be the most realistic example of such abuse?

there are hundreds of PoS variants.
some involve using proof of resource (hard drive space) as a way try ensuring pools of 'addresses' dont occur.. by only allowing one address per device/node.
end result people use many raspberry pi's to show as 'individual' address per device/node.. but are all housed in one location.. so pools end up being formed anyway

like i said no matter what different PoS varient methodology people can think up... if the coin gains any notoriety and infrastructure value(spend ability) people will start gaining desire to be part of it and then start looking at how they can game the system to get a little extra luck / bigger slice of the pie.

but again putting the morals of distribution of wealth aside... putting the basement dweller can be rich aside..
just looking at the network security of PoS vs chainwork(pow).. PoW wins

the reason people cry that PoW is unfair.. is exactly the reason PoW is mor secure... because no random person can just get in at ground level and decide what is valid or not. it requires ALOT of resourses, time and cost to secure a block.. and thats the point

[The One]

bitcoins PoW mining is not insecure nor is it exploited... asic boost is much the same as the GPU days of ATI(openCL) vs Geforce(cuda)

It's not insecure but it's not properly decentralized either. It's just totally stupid to do when there are better ways that don't need some contortions to get it running.

And calling the whole thing "mine" is already bullshit. There is no mining. Coins are not mined. Mining means you dig up dirt to get valuable raw goods out of it, or in a virtual world, you find your "ore" (coins) in a mess of complicated mathematical algorithms, that you do some work to actually calculate something valuable for the network. But that doesn't happen. "Mining" in the crypto world is more like a quiz show where the one who pushes the button first and has the correct answer get's rewarded points on his account by the quizzmaster (or jury in this kind, which is the network) for his efford and luck in being the first one who got a correct number in a lottery.

But with calling it "mining" the normie world (who don't know how PoW works) actually thinks that coins are (and need to be) produced. That there is a complicated mathematical algorithm that creates coins, which is not the case.

Creating a block for the chain is actually something a modern computer can do in seconds. You just need some kind of mechanism to select that one node that's authorized to do so. This is either by wasting energy (Proof of Work) or pure random with proving ownership of coins (Proof of Stake), or even with proving that someone burned some values (Proof of Burn) or was online for a certain amount of time (Proof of Uptime) or has the correct private key (Proof of Authority) and so on, the possibilities are endless.

But PoS in this regard is more honest and also more logical, since it doesn't seperate between those that use the network and those that maintain it.

 

It's minerals.

[The One]

Yes, and when people would learn, that they don't need these "server farms" that do some mathematical hocuspokus with megawatts of power to "create money" (which they don't), but could actually do it themself with a mere raspi or a notebook running a wallet, this would be great, would help to have more decentralization and more of a "people's money" as it was meant to.

then people will just sybil farm
run 10,000 raspi's from one location to eat a bigger slice if the... (no pun intended) Pie

It doesn't matter, if they have all their coins in one wallet or 10000, annual interest always remains the same.

If you had three wallets, one holds 80 coins, the other two 10 and you had an interest of 1% pa, after one year one wallet would be 88 and the other two 11. Thats the same interest as if you had 100 coins in one: 10 coins interest pa. You just wasted more energy (to run three pie instead of 1) and money (to buy 3 pie instead of just one).

You can't even do maths.

[The One]

pools have planned for the next few years... once you do research and stop relying on the reddit stuff that echo chambers in their cabin fever psychological small box.. you se the clearer picture

It's not buzzwording when all Bitcoin media and community centers echo the same thing.

You have the /r/bitcoin, and many people on this forum saying the same thing. Either they are horribly mis-informed, or this is really the route Bitcoin, as in the community wants to take.

Either way if this is what will happen, fine ,I respect the community's decision. But I won't care if it will go south. In my opinion, people should just vote with the dollar, if you don't like something, leave.


It's like if people are so stupid that if you dangle a carrot before them and drive them into the abyss, then there isn't really much you can expect from a community like this.

I thought an open minded community would be more resistant to dogmatism, but I was wrong. Humans are stupid let's face it. And I don't like to hang around closed minded people.

Concur.

[Bit_Happy]

((You can't even do maths.))

Practice math online with IXL. Our site offers thousands of online math practice skills covering pre-K to high school, with questions that...
https://www.google.com/search?q=math&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

[squatz1]

Some altcoin will take the throne if bitcoin doesn't change. Things change... deal with it or be pushed out of the way.  Pigs get slaughtered.

Highly doubt this is going to be the thing that happens, but I think the community is going to get the miners to do something if the core team won't be the people to step up and try to unify the community. BTC isn't going to lose it's real share (which is people using BTC for usage, not for trading) to a coin that is only used for traders (like most altcoins)

Bitcoin will change, only time will tell though if it's going to be a fast or a very slow change. At this rate, and with all the current news I'm personally expecting it to be one of those changes that is really slow.

[deisik]

Yes, and when people would learn, that they don't need these "server farms" that do some mathematical hocuspokus with megawatts of power to "create money" (which they don't), but could actually do it themself with a mere raspi or a notebook running a wallet, this would be great, would help to have more decentralization and more of a "people's money" as it was meant to.

then people will just sybil farm
run 10,000 raspi's from one location to eat a bigger slice if the... (no pun intended) Pie

any system can be co-opted/corrupted given the right time and desire to do it

Obviously, the absence of proof is not proof of absence

Just like it happened with decentralized digital currencies, one day one guy (a new Satoshi Nakamoto of sorts) will come up with a solution that will fix the issue in a reliable way (through cryptography or otherwise). Apart from that, as I understand it, with PoS currencies (well, at least, with some of them) your voice "weighs" as much as how many coins you have, so there shouldn't be any sense in splitting the coins into thousands of wallets since your "dividend" (stake) will remain absolutely the same. What am I missing?

[mindphuq]

ive been around since 2012.

Still you claimed that one could spread their balance over 100,000 wallets and then stake 100,000 times that often.
This is not how it works. A PoS working like this would indeed be pretty stupid and would be exploited as soon as the coin implementing this launched.

You wont get selected more often, because the selection is not just random but random with a probability factor that's determined by your wallet's weight. 1000 coins get selected more often than 0.001 coins, at the end of the day it doesn't matter if the balance of 1000 coins you own sits in one wallet with just one address or fractions of it in 1000 wallets with 1000 addresses.

[Decentradical]

The raspberry pi farm wasn't very adequate. What would be the most realistic example of such abuse?

there are hundreds of PoS variants.

That's why I asked for the most realistic abuse. IE aimed at the most basic, and common form of PoS. Which is simply a modest (say, 1% whatever) of new coins that get rewarded to each staking wallet according to the amount of coins they hold.  

some involve using proof of resource (hard drive space) as a way try ensuring pools of 'addresses' dont occur.. by only allowing one address per device/node.

I don't think anyone within Bitcoin or Ethereum or Dash or any other PoW coin looking to PoS is suggesting that. Let's not attack strawman, they all want wallet-sized staking.

like i said no matter what different PoS varient methodology people can think up... if the coin gains any notoriety and infrastructure value(spend ability) people will start gaining desire to be part of it and then start looking at how they can game the system to get a little extra luck / bigger slice of the pie.

but again putting the morals of distribution of wealth aside... putting the basement dweller can be rich aside..
just looking at the network security of PoS vs chainwork(pow).. PoW wins 

I don't think anyone finds mere assertions very convincing though. It's vague and unsubstantiated. How do you define network security? 51% attack cost? Because that would favour PoS. Any external attacker would have to buy their way into a coin before they can start attacking. And because no coin is 100% liquid the attacker would actually end up increasing the marketcap exponentially in his attempt to seize a sufficient share for his attack. 

PoS would actually benefit from such attack attempts. Now a PoW coin like Bitcoin only has very few people doing all the mining. If only a couple of them drop out of that little rat race the difficulty would collapse and the remaining miners would have the right resources for a PoW attack. That's the problem with this kind of centralization.

[classicsucks]

And Litecoin will most likely be a new king of crypto

BWHAHAHAH



What a classic Pump-n-Dump

[franky1]

ive been around since 2012.

Still you claimed that one could spread their balance over 100,000 wallets and then stake 100,000 times that often.
This is not how it works. A PoS working like this would indeed be pretty stupid and would be exploited as soon as the coin implementing this launched.

You wont get selected more often, because the selection is not just random but random with a probability factor that's determined by your wallet's weight. 1000 coins get selected more often than 0.001 coins, at the end of the day it doesn't matter if the balance of 1000 coins you own sits in one wallet with just one address or fractions of it in 1000 wallets with 1000 addresses.

lol
seems your not reading your own words...
your revealing the flaw while trying to debunk the same flaw.. lol

say the stake is 0.001 minimum

i have 10,000 coins

i can spread my coins over 1000 addresses
meaning each address has 10coins.

now do you think my stakes will get chosen more often than a person with just 0.001
go on be honest. how often will i win compared to a person with only 0.001

think about it 1001 possible 'forgers' 1 with 0.001 at stake and 1000 with 10 coins at stake.
so it not only by having 10 coins vs 0.001 solves the 'weight' part.
but the 1000 also gives me 99,99% of the pie by owning 1000 of 1001 'randomness chance'

anyway we have meandered off topic to th nth degree.

we really need to slap any dev with a wet fish that refuses community input about how devs are halting utility and screwing up functionality, especially if their reply is not 'here is some code'.. but instead 'go back to fiat'