POW vs. POS

[TheGodson]

Is there anyway for someone to explain this in not so technical terms, the pros and cons of both of these and what they are?

From my understanding:

POW (proof of work) is bitcoin being mined through mining rigs using computers. The first computer that finds the answer distributes it to the network and it is added to the blockchain and the miner gets a reward. So the proof of work is the computer computation.

POS (proof of stake) is bitcoin being mined simply by owning that coin over an arbitrary amount of time. You hold the coin and get more of that coin, because you hold it.

Is this correct?

[1713929924]

1713929924

[1713929924]

1713929924

[1713929924]

1713929924

[1713929924]

1713929924

[1713929924]

1713929924

[nc50lc]

Yes, that's correct and simple.

in addition:
Proof of Work (POW) is "Mining" using hardwares like Processors, GPUs, ASICs or even HDD/RAM.
Proof of Stake (POS) selection can be randomized depending on the "stake" which is directly or indirectly based on the holder's total number of coins in possession.

Every POS coins differ a lot in picking/distributing the reward.
Some are using "MasterNodes" that pose as a full node and a non-hashing miner that holds the owner's coins at stake.
Some are simple higher share higher chance which can easily leads to centralization.

[bob123]

in addition:
Proof of Work (POW) is "Mining" using hardwares like Processors, GPUs, ASICs or even HDD/RAM.

You can't mine with a HDD. Neither with RAM only.
A HDD does store data. It does NOT calculate anything. Particularly it is not possible to calculate hashes on an HDD.
The same does apply to RAM. Thats 'just' memory.

Every POS coins differ a lot in picking/distributing the reward.
~snip~
Some are simple higher share higher chance which can easily leads to centralization.

This CAN lead to more centralisation than POW, but doesn't have to.
It doesn't really matter whether you stake an insane amount of money to get a big % of the total hashrate or just buy an insane amount of ASICS (for an insane amount of money) to gain the same big % of the hashrate.

[coin.info]

In addition to that, there are several major advantages of PoS over PoW. The most important in our opinion is that it's not damaging the environment as much as the PoW, as the whole "mining" process involves the usaging a lot of electricity. There was a research which pointed out that the mining worldwide uses as much electricity as a small country (Moldova, to be precise) and those costs and effects will only go up. On the contrary, PoS doesn't use nearly as much electricity. The other advantage is that for PoS you need to own and "lock" the currency, which means you need to buy it in first place and that points out that you actually believe in the project, as for the PoW you only need a mining hardware and nothing more. You can "mine" a cryptocurrency and sell it right after that, which is just the opposite of the original idea of cryptocurrencies.

[bob123]

in addition:
Proof of Work (POW) is "Mining" using hardwares like Processors, GPUs, ASICs or even HDD/RAM.

You can't mine with a HDD. Neither with RAM only.
A HDD does store data. It does NOT calculate anything. Particularly it is not possible to calculate hashes on an HDD.
The same does apply to RAM. Thats 'just' memory.

Then you should read about "Proof-of-Capacity" consensus method, even though i think this idea don't work well.

Proof of Capacity (PoC) is not the same as Proof of Work (PoW). OP was mentioning PoW vs. PoS.
But this still doesn't mean that you can 'mine' with your HD.

It is more like staking your storage (e.g. lending to others). You are not actively using the space to calculate something.
Thats basically mining through 'staking storage'. Just like you can mine coin X by staking coin X for a timepsan of Y.

[yojodojo21]

There is always ups and downs, But the real question there is which one would obtain more support from crypto individual user?

I simply understand that POW needs technical analysis, while in POS is upon the amount of numbers.

[thecodebear]

PoW's disadvantage is all the energy use. In a world where most of of energy coms from fossil fuels that is a problem. But PoW has also stood the test of time, we know it is highly secure.

PoS solves the energy issue because there is no computation arms race involved. However proof of stake basically lets the rich get richer. While that is also true in PoW, PoW it isn't related to your share of the coin. In PoS the more supply of the coin your control the more money you get. That's more of a problem that PoW's competition for computing power that is completely outside controlling the supply of the coin. Also PoS works a lot better if no new coins are being generated. Because otherwise the economic inequality of the situation gets even far worse, if the people who have the most coins not only get most of the tx fees but also most of the newly minted coin. That sets up a recipe of the rich getting richer and controlling the majority of the future supply simply by the fact that they have much of the existing supply, which would be disastrous for the economy of the coin. And in Ethereum I believe they announced that the lower limit on being able to stake coins when they get PoS running is going to be 1000 Eth. So in that specific case literally only the very rich (and specifically the very rich in Ethereum) will be able to "mine", which makes the problem even worse again.

PoS also means for mining you have to lock your coins away. So PoS kinda goes directly against it a coin being a payment platform.


Neither one is perfect. They both have big flaws.

[Karartma1]

If Ethereum would switch to a progressive POS adoption it will make the perfect altcoin scam cycle.
1 Premine with token sale
2 POW
3 Hybrid POW/POS
4 POS
5 Bankrupt

That's so 2013/2014

[onurgozupek]

Yes, that's correct and simple.

in addition:
Proof of Work (POW) is "Mining" using hardwares like Processors, GPUs, ASICs or even HDD/RAM.
Proof of Stake (POS) selection can be randomized depending on the "stake" which is directly or indirectly based on the holder's total number of coins in possession.

Every POS coins differ a lot in picking/distributing the reward.
Some are using "MasterNodes" that pose as a full node and a non-hashing miner that holds the owner's coins at stake.
Some are simple higher share higher chance which can easily leads to centralization.

This is the simplest basic explanation. Proof of Work (PoW) requires more calculation power and right now it's not mineable with desktop/laptop CPUs so, mostly ASICs (for Bitcoin, Litecoin etc.) and GPUs (Ethereum, zCash etc) are being used for mining (actually, calculating the hash nounce value according to the algorithms)

Proof of Stake, requires keeping altcoins in the Wallet and keeping it online (for syncing blockchain) As much as you have the coin, you get reward.

[Sagitta_A]

PoS is far more advanced approach since it demands much less electricity. However, this approach is good when it's applied from the first days of project's life. Live migration from PoW to PoS is very painful since it demotivates miners and inevitably leads the project's to its fatal split.

[Subal_Damudar]

PoS is far more advanced approach since it demands much less electricity. However, this approach is good when it's applied from the first days of project's life. Live migration from PoW to PoS is very painful since it demotivates miners and inevitably leads the project's to its fatal split.

Depending on who you ask. POS is may be a step backward. A lot of stalled projects are POS based which looked good when they started.

[shiroocrypto]

PoS is far more advanced approach since it demands much less electricity. However, this approach is good when it's applied from the first days of project's life. Live migration from PoW to PoS is very painful since it demotivates miners and inevitably leads the project's to its fatal split.

I think POS is only advanced with respect to its "greener approach" to mining

With respect to a coin, there just aren't proper POS (and MN) models that work as well as POW models. If you browse the altcoin announcements the few kind of POS models that show up:

* Fully POS, you need to buy the coin with btc/fiat in order to be able to "mine". So you're basically asked to invest money in order to get a higher stake probability. What people don't tell you is that you can very easily be out-invested in this model because of the increasing coin supply over time (you own less coins vs total coins) AND the amount of "big spenders" that tend to increase for staking. This means that you sit with the problem of your network weight decreasing over time.
* Hybrid POW/POS, only rewards the initial POW contributors tbh. But because of the nature of POS, their POW shares gives them such a vast control over the coin during it's lifetime that it will be very hard to compete unless you buy their shares out. And in this case, these POW contributors can choke the supply if they wanted to, which is a form of centralization
* Masternodes I have mixed feelings about. They seem to be a fair approach so far and the coin yields seems to be distributed evenly over the number of MN's in the network. I suppose that this way, the only way to yield more coins is to buy more MNs which seems to be a reasonable ask. For me the key balance here is the collateral required for a MN. Too low and then everybody is a MN. Too high and then there's only a few MN which rewards the early adopters

To me, POS are very weighted towards its whale buyers. MN can be done in a manner that's fair. My main thought principal is that cryptocurrency was always meant for everybody, so some layman with a scrappy old machine would always get the opportunity to mine and gain coins. Yes, there are centralization attempts like mining farms and ASICs (nothing wrong with these btw); but it's not like your old machine vs an ASIC, you can join a pool and still get rewards. And when a coin gets popular, it's increasingly harder to get centralization over it via mining (unless you're XVG LOL); making it more fair than POS.

While I appreciate POS's green concept, it's just that the current currency/financial models feel very biased towards big spenders, which I feel causes centralization.

I think the only fair POS approach I found in a coin, and I am not sure I can even call it POS is with NEO. There, you get GAS from holding NEO even if it's just 1 NEO. And that is something that's guaranteed unlike a POS network which has your rewards as a variable.

[btcdevil]

I'd say it's correct if it's not technical explanation. But AFAIK when you stake your coins, you can't use that coins since it's "locked" and for few people it's big cons.

I think you got wrong with POS terms, as the coin not get locked, it can be used but the POS means certain part of time you have to hold the coin in the wallet to get the POS coins , it means that it is proof that in the stake time you were holding this much of coin for that you get percentage of coin for staking.

I think both have their own goods and bad terms. In POW you can mine through hardware according to the coin specifications , so it means it will also give you mining expenses. But in POS  you just have to hold the coins in  wallet and according to it you get the coins as per the stake percentage.

[cashberycoin.com]

Yes, that's correct and simple.

in addition:
Proof of Work (POW) is "Mining" using hardwares like Processors, GPUs, ASICs or even HDD/RAM.
Proof of Stake (POS) selection can be randomized depending on the "stake" which is directly or indirectly based on the holder's total number of coins in possession.

Every POS coins differ a lot in picking/distributing the reward.
Some are using "MasterNodes" that pose as a full node and a non-hashing miner that holds the owner's coins at stake.
Some are simple higher share higher chance which can easily leads to centralization.

Thank you for full answer!
yes, it is right, for example, BTC and ETH have two this alghorithms, because, we can mining its

[Ucy]

In addition to that, there are several major advantages of PoS over PoW. The most important in our opinion is that it's not damaging the environment as much as the PoW, as the whole "mining" process involves the usaging a lot of electricity. There was a research which pointed out that the mining worldwide uses as much electricity as a small country (Moldova, to be precise) and those costs and effects will only go up. On the contrary, PoS doesn't use nearly as much electricity. The other advantage is that for PoS you need to own and "lock" the currency, which means you need to buy it in first place and that points out that you actually believe in the project, as for the PoW you only need a mining hardware and nothing more. You can "mine" a cryptocurrency and sell it right after that, which is just the opposite of the original idea of cryptocurrencies.

Bro, not all energy sources can damage the environment. A large scale miner could solely depend on hydro, solar and other clean energy sources without harming the environment. I just think the anti PoW people have problems with something else not really the energy aspect

[vit05]

In addition to that, there are several major advantages of PoS over PoW. The most important in our opinion is that it's not damaging the environment as much as the PoW, as the whole "mining" process involves the usaging a lot of electricity. There was a research which pointed out that the mining worldwide uses as much electricity as a small country (Moldova, to be precise) and those costs and effects will only go up. On the contrary, PoS doesn't use nearly as much electricity. The other advantage is that for PoS you need to own and "lock" the currency, which means you need to buy it in first place and that points out that you actually believe in the project, as for the PoW you only need a mining hardware and nothing more. You can "mine" a cryptocurrency and sell it right after that, which is just the opposite of the original idea of cryptocurrencies.

Bro, not all energy sources can damage the environment. A large scale miner could solely depend on hydro, solar and other clean energy sources without harming the environment. I just think the anti PoW people have problems with something else not really the energy aspect

Hydropower also has a major impact on the environment:

• Blocks fish migrations
• Transform a free-flowing river ecosystem to an artificial slack-water reservoir habitat.
• Holds back sediments that would naturally replenish downstream ecosystems.
• Large dams have led to the extinction of many fish and other aquatic species, the disappearance of birds in floodplains, huge losses of forest, wetland and farmland, erosion of coastal deltas, and many other unmitigable impacts.
• Most reservoirs are significant contributors to greenhouse gas emissions (a recent study pegged global greenhouse gas emissions from reservoirs on par with that of the aviation industry, about 4% of human-caused GHG emissions).

Hydropower can be considered a green solution when compared to coal utilization. But if we could avoid it, it would be better.

But still, PoW is today the only proven attack-safe system in a fully decentralized environment. This is the main discussion. There is no safe, decentralized PoS system yet. What exists are centralized systems that at some point want to create a decentralized autonomous governance authority.

All decentralized currencies today use PoW. All the others are still centralized projects with a large budget for the organization itself to maintain and spend on marketing.

source: IR

[r1s2g3]

Is there anyway for someone to explain this in not so technical terms, the pros and cons of both of these and what they are?

From my understanding:

POW (proof of work) is bitcoin Coin being mined through mining rigs using computers. The first computer that finds the answer distributes it to the network and it is added to the blockchain and the miner gets a reward. So the proof of work is the computer computation.

POS (proof of stake) is bitcoin Coin being mined staking that coin over an arbitrary amount of time. You hold the coin and get more of that coin, because you hold it.

Is this correct?

I did some edits on your quote and your understanding is correct.

Let me come to Pros and Cons.

POW: It is costly method as you need Hardware(sometimes specialized also)and lot of electricity is used.
         For Network big like Bitcoin, 51 % attack cost is too high but for some new coin where network is not so big (or do not have many miners)
          51% attack  can be successfully executed.
         It make coin fully decentralized and anybody is free to mine.

POS: It is cheap method and no specialized hardware is required. Electricity requirement are also minimal.
         One who has large stash of the coin will get big share, making rich more richer.
         If coin holders want to keep somebody out of network they are able to do so by not distributing there coins outside their network.


        

[bob123]

POW:
         For Network big like Bitcoin, 51 % attack cost is too high but for some new coin where network is not so big (or do not have many miners)
          51% attack   can be successfully executed.
         It make coin fully decentralized and anybody is free to mine.

An 51% attack is completely independent from the consensus algorithm (PoS/PoW).
Decentralization also does not depend on PoS vs. PoW. Depending on the implementation of the PoS algorithm, mostly anyone can mine.

POS: It is cheap method and no specialized hardware is required.

It is not cheap, since you have to lock away a big amount of money. It is like receiving interest.

POS:
         One who has large stash of the coin will get big share, making rich more richer.

The same applies to PoW:
One who has large stash of money will get a lot of asics (and therefore more hashrate), making rich more richer.

POS:
         If coin holders want to keep somebody out of network they are able to do so by not distributing there coins outside their network.

[nc50lc]

POW - Half pre mined and rest of the coins will be mined by miners by validating the Transactions.
POS - all coins pre mined before add to circulations

No, leave the scamcoins and their conspiracy theories out of the discussion.

There's no such thing as "pre-mine" that's just the early stage of a coin which only the developers and early adopters are the only miners in the network.
Scamcoins/Shitcoins usually use that as an excuse to their Pump and Dump scam: 50% Premined for future developments, etc.

One scamcoin modus for example: Developers have secretly mined the earliest blocks until they reached a sufficient amount enough to pump the price once it reach the exchanges, when the investors flock in, they will dump the remaining coins in their possession ~dirty profit.

And you've mistakenly identified POS as ERC20 Tokens.

[evilsign]

POW - Half pre mined and rest of the coins will be mined by miners by validating the Transactions.
POS - all coins pre mined before add to circulations

No, leave the scamcoins and their conspiracy theories out of the discussion.

There's no such thing as "pre-mine" that's just the early stage of a coin which only the developers and early adopters are the only miners in the network.
Scamcoins/Shitcoins usually use that as an excuse to their Pump and Dump scam: 50% Premined for future developments, etc.

One scamcoin modus for example: Developers have secretly mined the earliest blocks until they reached a sufficient amount enough to pump the price once it reach the exchanges, when the investors flock in, they will dump the remaining coins in their possession ~dirty profit.

And you've mistakenly identified POS as ERC20 Tokens.

Thank you very much, sir, for your explanation. Sometimes some people really have mistaken and confused. My friend ever asks me why there is a token (erc20) can be mined. After I search on the internet, I found about https://postoken.org. What do you think about it, sir?