Why btc cannot move pow to pos

[witcher_sense]

The reason why Bitcoin will move from POW to POS is for it to maintain its credibility. Some naive people will always say POS is more decentralized and secure but in reality, POS are centralized though it may be secure an example is what Binance did to stop some fund stolen by a hacker on their Binance Smart Chain network this year.

It is akin to saying that we need governments with armed people to protect honest people from violence: it works (maybe) until your "protector" decides to use weapons against those honest law-abiding persons. Who will guard against a centralized body that has access to your funds, and who can dictate what to do? If they can cut hackers off the system and return stolen money, they also can take out money from people who never thought that they are going to be deemed criminals in the future. Proof-of-stake is the quintessence of a permissioned financial system in which it is elite groups of wealthy stakers who can and will decide the fate of less successful participants and who, in turn, is going to be controlled directly by powerful representatives of the system for which bitcoin has been created to be an alternative.

[1714066098]

1714066098

[1714066098]

1714066098

[1714066098]

1714066098

[Ucy]

This question comes, Do btc network can move to POW to POS?
I am just asking and there is a issue that electricity bill too. Energy problem is most hottest topic all now. so lets discuss this

Bitcoin PoW requires working hard to earn reward rather than requiring money. A PoW consensus mechanism requires you to solve puzzles and get rewarded once the work is done.. But PoS says you just need to prove you own hugh amount of money to get a job and earn rewards. It's a very corrupt system... The kind of corruption we see in "third world countries"

Hardwork requires alot of energy. The important thing is to make sure that much of the energy is going into solving problems rather than getting wasted in any form. If most/all of the energy is used to solve problems then there will be no need to consume more electricity from nuclear power plant (for example) to solve the problems the mining hardware has solved. The miners are supposed to use energy efficiently to prevent waste of energy that should be used in solving problems like heating homes during winter.

[so98nn]

This question comes, Do btc network can move to POW to POS?
I am just asking and there is a issue that electricity bill too. Energy problem is most hottest topic all now. so lets discuss this

Oh yeah the energy problem, it’s good way to market bitcoin actually. At least for searching the energy consumption peeps are searching bitcoin on the Google and Once they realise it’s nothing as compared to the worlds energy consumption they would definitely go and buy it. Far cheaper than printing money in a press, hiring world class security to protect it and yet getting robbed now and then. Paying salaries to press runners and what not.

Definitely Bitcoin is working on PoW because that’s what Mr. Satoshi dreamed about and had all 360 thoughts while developing blockchain.

PoS came in afterwards when they thought about new business line. Funny.

[BlackHatCoiner]

Why does none of the new coins use Proof of Waste.

Because they're waste themselves. 

[LegendaryK]

Why does none of the new coins use Proof of Waste.

Because they're waste themselves.  

Actually.
 

https://ethereum.org/en/developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms/pos/

Ethereum switched on its proof-of-stake mechanism in 2022 because
it is more secure, less energy-intensive, and better for implementing new scaling solutions compared to the previous proof-of-work architecture.

So the developer thinks PoS more secure, less energy-intensive, and better for implementing new scaling solutions.
 


Considering some of your other statements

A more decentralized blockchain puts scaling above all.

How you can support PoW centralized 4 person pool operators dominated security, is a flaw in reasoning,
but seeing as how you are a btc cult member most of your thinking about crypto is flawed.  

Every altcoin in existence has a higher onchain transaction capacity and greater ability to scale onchain than btc flawed PoW design.
But ignoring that is your strong suit. 

[BlackHatCoiner]

So the developer thinks PoS more secure

I'm obviously questioning that part, and I've been questioning it since your stay here. I have also been questioning the centralization part. We all have been. Counter-arguments have been submitted. You're stuck at ad hominem.

but seeing as how you are a btc cult member most of your thinking about crypto is flawed.

Says the person who doesn't understand the essence of running a node. 

[Hamza2424]

Aw many of my dear fellows explained this to you that Bitcoin is considered as the real Decentralized Currency and people not even consider is Decentralized on the same page they consider Bitcoin as real Stpre of Value. A pure asset which protect their privacy and their rights for the financial freedom so this is not even possible to move Bitcoin to the POS as what makes Bitcoin the King is POW.

[NeuroticFish]

So the developer thinks PoS more secure, less energy-intensive, and better for implementing new scaling solutions.

Actually that's what he says, not what he thinks. Never forget that tiny detail.
And, unfortunately for ETH, the reality is already showing how badly centralized it is.

The centralization aspect was quite evident right after the Merge, as 46.15% of the nodes for storing data, processing transactions and adding new blockchain blocks could be attributed to just two addresses.

Current staking activities look very centralized, with the leading liquid staking protocol Lido and leading centralized exchanges such as Coinbase, Kraken and Binance accounting for over 60% of the staked ETH.

Every altcoin in existence has a higher onchain transaction capacity and greater ability to scale onchain than btc flawed PoW design.

And still the altcoins are cheaper than Bitcoin. Wonder why...
Bitcoin doesn't afford to make experiments that can easily lead to mistakes. This doesn't make it flawed.
If you consider the new centralized ETH or BNB chains so much better, why don't you just remain at your bank account? Just because of its name?

[DooMAD]

One has to wonder ,

If Proof of Waste is not a doomed tech.

Why does none of the new coins use Proof of Waste.

Because most new coins get their few months of hype and then they disappear never to be heard from again.  Mining is a commitment, because you often have to buy specialised hardware.  And not many people want to commit to fly-by-night crapcoins.  Otherwise you're investing in hardware just to be left with an expensive space-heater when the coin you're mining becomes worthless and all the mindless speculators have moved on.  Whereas Proof-of-Stake is ideally suited for flash-in-the-pan hype-fests which are totally lacking in substance and purpose, because you can just sell it and move on to the next pump'n'dump turd.

Good coins are more than the sum of their mechanisms.  They need to fulfill a purpose.  If people are actually going to use a coin, meaning it actually has a future, then you want Proof-of-Work and a strong hashrate to ensure those users can transact securely and safely, without interference from intermediaries and without centralised entities suddenly changing the supply rules or co-opting the network in other nefarious ways.  

If, however, a coin is some hollow, get-rich-quick scheme, where it doesn't matter whether the network is secure because most of it is going to be held on exchanges by speculators and no one is going to spend any of it (likely because it has no merchant adoption and no one could spend it even if they wanted to), then yeah, Proof-of-Stake is 100% the way to go.  

As for Ethereum, I suppose Proof-of-Stake is also a fallback for when you realise you've screwed your alignment of incentives, which is exactly what they did.  ETH tried to do too much and their infrastructure simply couldn't handle it.  I guarantee you they wouldn't be doing this if they had any other choice.  'Plan A' with the DAO didn't pan out a few years back, so ETH and ETC split.  And now 'Plan B' has failed too, so this is either 'Plan C' or perhaps even one of the later letters.  It's possible I've lost count of the comedy of errors.  They're in damage-limitation mode and trying to spin it as a positive.  But anyone with any sense recognises it's another failure.  

[The Cryptovator]

Imagine who will do everything when you will move from POW to POS? Is there a team? It's not like a hard fork that anyone can do it. Will the community accept this migration? Can you shut down old chain miners who don't want to stop themselves? How will you control them? If miners continue mining then the old chain still will be live. Due to true decentralization, anyone can't move Bitcoin from POW to PoS? There will be many more questions definitely during the move. So it's quite impossible.

[Piesel]

PoS is far more centralized. If you want possible more decentralized system, bitcoin PoW is it.

Proof of stake does not only make the network more centralized bht could also give the power of the network to a few users who hods the highest stake therr by making them controlled the network trasaction confirmations.

So ultimately bitcoin is not design to be controlled by a few user and bitcoin decentralization is what give bitcoin that power of being uncontrolled.

Bitcoin mining hashrate is increasing. It means bitcoin mining is profitable for miners. Even despite the recent significant bear market, bthe itcoin mining hash rate still reached an all-time high.

Bitcoin network hasrate have been touching all time high on several occasions, and Bitcoin miners are constantly looking for an improved and environmentally friendly energy supply that will aid more bitcoin morning efficiency such as Bitcoin mining green energy supplies so no need for proof of stake for bitcoin since there are alternatives to most of the contending issues facing Bitcoin proof of work algorithm.

[philipma1957]

This question comes, Do btc network can move to POW to POS?
I am just asking and there is a issue that electricity bill too. Energy problem is most hottest topic all now. so lets discuss this

how about this I used to believe in free speech until I read your thread topic.

now I believe in deletion of inappropriate topics such as yours.


If you could make the effort to prove me correct and explain why I think you are completely inappropriate to ask this question I would be impressed.

[dansus021]

Btc can move to PoS if the software is there and the majority of network aggree with it but i think its not going to PoS but the miner keep look a renewable energy to proof bitcoin is not that bad

[DapanasFruit]

I don't think it is a good idea for Bitcoin to be moving to PoW mechanism...at least for now! Time will eventually tell which is the better option: PoS or PoW. We already know that in terms of security and decentralization, it is PoW that is the most reliable and this one of the many things that define Bitcoin so taking that away and you are left with just skeletons. Now, the biggest concern with PoW is, of course, the huge amount of power that it is using in the mining and confirmation process and zeroing on this aspect alone there is a growing movement to stop Bitcoin from further growing...as if doing so will stop climate change altogether. On my side, there are far more industries even unnecessary ones that are eating out a lot of power but they are allowed to be doing business so why make a big exception on Bitcoin?

[LegendaryK]

but seeing as how you are a btc cult member most of your thinking about crypto is flawed.

Says the person who doesn't understand the essence of running a node.  

What is funny , is you still don't understand it.  

Imagine who will do everything when you will move from POW to POS? Is there a team? It's not like a hard fork that anyone can do it. Will the community accept this migration? Can you shut down old chain miners who don't want to stop themselves? How will you control them? If miners continue mining then the old chain still will be live. Due to true decentralization, anyone can't move Bitcoin from POW to PoS? There will be many more questions definitely during the move. So it's quite impossible.

Exactly,
It is impossible for BTC to convert to PoS, because their is literally no one in charge to coordinate the change.
Which means when the US & Europe ban Proof of Waste, the only options are utter destruction of btc or becoming a token on a PoS network before the crash.
However, 4 mining pool operator control over 51% hashrate, 4 people colluding is centralized.
But the pool operators only centralize the transactions control, the code development is still rudderless.

One has to wonder ,

If Proof of Waste is not a doomed tech.

Why does none of the new coins use Proof of Waste.

Mining is a commitment, because you often have to buy specialised hardware.  

Good coins are more than the sum of their mechanisms.  

As for Ethereum

You kind of just rambled.

So if a dummy buy an asic, he can mine BTC & Bitcoin Cash until the PoW bans take place.

But if an Investor buy a PoS coin, it can literally only stake that single coin.
Hate to break it to you the staking coin is more specialized than the mining asic. 

PoS coins don't waste energy, PoW coins do waste insane amounts of energy.
Energy that people could be using to heat/cool their homes, or use for cooking or refrigeration.
Energy that people need to survive and have a decent life.

As for Ethereum, by converting to PoS,
it is more secure, less energy-intensive, and better for implementing new scaling solutions compared to the previous proof-of-work architecture.
And here is a biggie for you,
Ethereum PoS is totally immune to the coming Proof of Waste Bans.


You know why all of these topics about converting BTC to PoS keep popping up.
The BTC masses are not as stupid as the BTC cult nutjobs,
a few of them are starting to realize , hey what happens to my btc once the US and Europe ban PoW mining. (They can see it coming.)

Some think, a quick conversion to PoS ,
and that can't happen due to the lack of leadership in btc development.
So thinking PoS is going to save BTC network is not going to happen.
Once the PoW Bans are enacted, there won't be 2 years to start the conversion, figure out what PoS code is required,
what change to make or not make to the reward system, whether or not to become deflationary by burning transaction fees.
The BTC community is literally incapable of a successful conversion.

So that only leaves wrapped tokens, which is already being used,
https://wbtc.network/

Wrapped Bitcoin delivers the power of Bitcoin
with the flexibility of an ERC20 token

Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) is the first ERC20 token backed 1:1 with Bitcoin.
Completely transparent. 100% verifiable. Community led.

https://www.tronweekly.com/cardano-wrapped-bitcoin-boost-adoption/

The only other option will be to just let btc death spiral.

[LegendaryK]

POS to me seem to be a very error prone, easy to manipulate and more like share holder system. There had no major blockchain which has so far been able to grow on own to the scale needed. Moreover switching to pos for bitcoin is a herculean task. I dont see this in near future

I suggest you look at the following
Ethereum
Cardano

Both easily out-scale the pathetic proof of waste network btc uses.

 

[franky1]

I suggest you look at the following
Ethereum
Cardano

Leg-End
i know you are a ether fan girl
we get it. no need to self promote all the time

the thing is although ether allows many pennny pinchers to tokenise an eth. and convert that eth to genesis a new network where they can then sell pennies for obsscene prices

but you are ignoring the security of the underlying networks you adore. you only want to make bitcoin a network where you can lazily invest nothing but get passive income for free..

you forget that that energy is not wasted.
when energy is produced. it doesnt live for ever. once its done a lap around the grid it does not return to base to be put back into a box. once produced its used

energy companies want customers. they want people buying their energy. they even have to upgrade their production to cater to the future meaning the more customers they can get now the faster they can upgrade

when building a new 2GW power plant. they are not building to demand of today. they are planning ahead to build for the demand of 50+ years time
meaning the current demand today is 1GW to be ready to also cater to the the community of 2070 2GW estimate

but with population demand today of 1GW they are not fully utilising their capacity and only getting 50% of potential income now. thus they end up double charging customers.

where as if they can sell 0.2gw to bitcoin asic farms they can get more income and not have to charge the other 1GW as much

bitcoiners can buy up long term contracts to assure power companies of long term income and give then alot of money to start expanding more sooner rather than waiting decades for population growth to finally 'buy in' to the capacity

..
as for ethereums transition to PoS
what you are not realising is springs $1500 market price was backed by $700 of underlying mining costs that helped support its 'non zero' bottom market price from going to double digit prices

but now that underlying cost is less than $40 meaning that ethereum market price is more speculative bubble amount which can shrink down to double digit amounts

..
as for the security of bitcoin vs ethereum
when so much stake is stacked in coinbase.. if coinbase wanted to change some policy/rule.. thousands of users staked in coinbase will NOT vote against coinbase no matter the maliciousness of the new policy. because voting against coinbase does not hurt coinbase. it hurts the users who lose their stake. thus coinbase has a no-risk ability to change rules but users have a 100% risk of coinbase changing rules if rejected. and so coinbase ends up having more power to change the rules without resistance

bitcoin however. the mining investment vs code policy change does not harm users. users can just reject blocks . miners can easily pool jump in seconds without risk of that value but effectively protecting the network

bitcoins security model is better for all.. PoS is not

[LegendaryK]

@franky1

You did get the part where, I said the btc dev community was incapable of conversion from PoW to PoS.
right?

Why don't you end all of this PoS topics questions.
Because they are all happening, because people are worried about the coming US & Europe PoW bans.

So just explain to everyone why PoW will be able to survive the US & Europe ban and how they will still be able to trade PoW coins, even if the PoW bans include banning trading PoW coins on exchanges, and the price not collapse.
I won't even comment after your post, to leave that explanation post unsullied.  

I'll consider it a fairly tale to help me sleep, but the rest might believe you.

[tadamichi]

You did get the part where, I said the btc dev community was incapable of conversion from PoW to PoS.
right?

Not stupid enough to do it, fits it better.

Why don't you end all of this PoS topics questions.

Make the first step.

Because they are all happening, because people are worried about the coming US & Europe PoW bans.

So just explain to everyone why PoW will be able to survive the US & Europe ban and how they will still be able to trade PoW coins, even if the PoW bans include banning trading PoW coins on exchanges, and the price not collapse.

P2P, decentralization, censorship resistance, soundest money in circulation, europe & us aren’t the center of the world & Europe is more than just the EU & The EU is not a homogeneous place, where everything gets followed everywhere & Europeans and Americans that understand Bitcoin won’t bitch down to governments. Maybe go out in the world and meet people instead of crying in your room about fear of your grid collapsing and the world going under, because the only actually decentralized global sound money out there that can use power sources that are inaccessible for most other applications¹ uses as much electricity as fridges in the US².

¹ https://hbr.org/2021/05/how-much-energy-does-bitcoin-actually-consume Read this article and get your hormones together.
² https://ccaf.io/cbeci/index/comparisons

I won't even comment after your post, to leave that explanation post unsullied.  

Translation: you’ve admitted that you’re a fud spreading troll that can’t even participate in discussion, because after every single argument of you has been debunked for months, you don’t have any left.

[Lizzylove1]

Proof of Stakes is a centralized system, giving more to the rich and power, POS can seize your money while staking with a validator by just a single proposal and they tell you it's the people's will "democracy". POW is a decentralized structure and am happy bitcoin won't be switching to POS.