Why btc cannot move pow to pos

[NotATether]

https://www.cryptoglobe.com/latest/2022/10/cardano-ada-founder-on-why-pow-based-bitcoin-network-could-and-should-be-shut-down/

On Monday (October 3), Charles Hoskinson, Co-Founder and CEO of IOG (aka “IOHK”), the blockchain technology firm behind Cardano’s R&D, explained why it makes sense to stop mining more Bitcoin and converting all existing bitcoins to wrapped bitcoins (that exist on a smart contracts platform such as Ethereum or Cardano).

That is the dumbest idea I have ever heard (from him).

Bitcoin that wraps what? Cardano?

I mean, that would give ADA an actual use case and maybe Cardano bosses would sleep bettter at night knowing that they are not going to run out of investors in the long run.

[1714782787]

1714782787

[1714782787]

1714782787

[1714782787]

1714782787

[1714782787]

1714782787

[suzanne5223]

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.

I understand your point and this is the reason why I said for Bitcoin to maintain its credibility we won't change from POW to POS due to the possible abuse of power by the protector or elite groups.
Having said that, every aspect of cryptocurrency has its own Cons and Pros but in the end, it all depends on how each investor chooses their Cons and Pros. Despite the BNB network being a POS, a lot of crypto investors still choose it above other dApps due to the reputation of CZ.

[NotATether]

I understand your point and this is the reason why I said for Bitcoin to maintain its credibility we won't change from POW to POS due to the possible abuse of power by the protector or elite groups.
Having said that, every aspect of cryptocurrency has its own Cons and Pros but in the end, it all depends on how each investor chooses their Cons and Pros. Despite the BNB network being a POS, a lot of crypto investors still choose it above other dApps due to the reputation of CZ.

And what happens if the reputation of CZ goes down like (and I'm not asserting similarity to) Donald Trump?

Then the entire Binance Smart Chain would go down with him. That's why it is important NOT to tie a brand to any particular person.

[goldkingcoiner]

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

A POS Bitcoin would not be Bitcoin. It would be a POS version of the real Bitcoin. Throughout all these years POW Bitcoin has proven time and time again to be completely decentralized and fair. A POS version would become exactly the opposite. Right now the POS Ethereum has shown everyone how quickly this change will happen. ETH was basically centralized by a few addresses within the first few days of it switching to POS. I do not know the short term or long term real world consequences of this but I do not want to experiment on Bitcoin. Lets see what happens to Eth.

[justdimin]

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

It actually can, many people are against it so they are saying it can't, but it actually can move there. How would that work? Well, first of all we have way too much transactions in bitcoin, more than anything else, only rivalled by ETH on a good day, which means we need to figure out a way where POS would make sure that all of those transactions are covered in a timely manner, secondly we need to make sure security is tight, the whole point of miners are to make it double check and make sure it’s all good and there is no double spending or any other risky things going on, and lastly we need to make sure that everyone agrees to move to this new one, just like how we moved from legacy to segwit, that would be the key here.

[suzanne5223]

I understand your point and this is the reason why I said for Bitcoin to maintain its credibility we won't change from POW to POS due to the possible abuse of power by the protector or elite groups.
Having said that, every aspect of cryptocurrency has its own Cons and Pros but in the end, it all depends on how each investor chooses their Cons and Pros. Despite the BNB network being a POS, a lot of crypto investors still choose it above other dApps due to the reputation of CZ.

And what happens if the reputation of CZ goes down like (and I'm not asserting similarity to) Donald Trump?

Then the entire Binance Smart Chain would go down with him. That's why it is important NOT to tie a brand to any particular person.

Yes, It is important for a project not to be built on someone's reputation or invest in it based on a human current reputation because humans will always be human but unfortunately this is what some crypto enthusiasts care about most of the time and this is the reason why a project that has a team of influence in crypto space easily get the attention of the general public.
I am never a fan of BNB and I am even one of the people that said there was not much use case for the coin some years ago before Vitalik messed up with ETH which is what paves way for BNB, SOL, etc.

[LegendaryK]

Don't worry about the coming PoW ban,
Worry about the utilities just cutting off power to the miners.  
A reasonable person might recognize the security implications of wasting so much energy.
Luckily their are no reasonable people supporting bitcoin.  

https://cointelegraph.com/news/quebec-s-energy-manager-to-seek-government-approval-to-stop-powering-crypto-miners

Quebec’s energy manager to seek government approval to stop powering crypto miners

According to a Nov. 3 tweet from Canadian lawmaker Pierre Fitzgibbon,
the government will request a decree from the energy board to release the company from its obligation to power crypto miners in the province.
Hydro-Québec allocated 270 megawatts toward the mining firms,
but electricity demand in Québec is expected to grow to a point that powering crypto will put pressure on the energy supplier.

The report Hydro-Québec filed with the government’s energy board on Nov. 1 said temporarily reducing the power provided to mining firms could help prevent threats to the “reliability and security” of energy for Québec residents.

Canada Winters are only 6 months, that mining will be cut in Canada.
So much for those ASICS earning back their purchase cost.
Better get on the phone to see if their are enough stupid Venture Capitalist left to float those PoW operation until spring.  

 

[NotATether]

Don't worry about the coming PoW ban,
Worry about the utilities just cutting off power to the miners.  

You are forgetting that most miners have long-term contract agreements with the utilities and they can't just shut off the power like that without breaching the contract and open them up to lawsuits from the miner.

The Justice Department does not drink anti-PoW Kool-Aid.

[yhiaali3]

Theoretically bitcoin can move to POS, but the most important point that makes bitcoin go with POW is that it is more decentralized, more secure and stable network, it is difficult to get the hashrate needed to hack the bitcoin network because it costs a lot of money which makes the attack worthless, while it can be obtained On the quota required in the POS or the agreement of a group of validators to do network penetration, the only drawback of POW is the increased power consumption and this problem can be solved in the future by alternative energy or making chip miners that do not consume much power.

[Cookdata]

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

There are three important keys I learnt from Certik, they are Decentralization, Speed and Security. Bitcoin has Decentralization and Security but lacks speed which has been the number priority of Satoshi with proof of work and so far, there has never been any of that too that has been comprised, we have only been battling with speed which developers have been trying to improve but in all honesty, bitcoin cannot have the speeds compare to proof of stake because it will break the decentralization and security.

In all of that three, one must be given up, that is why you see most proof of stake has speed but they are prone to hacking and too centralized by a few groups of people, bitcoin cannot be proof of stake if they want to retain its security and decentralization.

[LegendaryK]

Don't worry about the coming PoW ban,
Worry about the utilities just cutting off power to the miners.  

You are forgetting that most miners have long-term contract agreements with the utilities and they can't just shut off the power like that without breaching the contract and open them up to lawsuits from the miner.

That is why they are seeking Government approval 1st.

I suggest you look up
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_majeure

Force majeure (lit. superior force, with the sense of overwhelming force, from French[1][2])
is a common clause in contracts which essentially frees both parties from liability or obligation when an extraordinary event or circumstance beyond the control of the parties, such as a war, strike, riot, crime, epidemic or sudden legal changes prevents one or both parties from fulfilling their obligations under the contract.

[Figon55]

With a lot of mind power, and painstaking work, the process has to be determined, resulting in a solution to the problem.
Bit coin should fulfill critical demand, not demand fat pow. When creating a block chain or creating a pos you need to show money to get any activity or eam, originally pos businesses thought 360.

[Nhazwrath]

simple easy explanation.


Centralization is in fact more efficient. 

Centralization is a massive fail/control point for any network from sovereign actors.  corrupted humans tend to work toward and in centralized institutions.  small groups of people should not have that much control over your value.

Decentralization is in fact less efficient.

Decentralization makes attacks on the network much harder to achieve ..  yes sections can be attacked and controlled the rest of the network stays up and or forks.  and bitcoin carries on.   and your value remains outside control of a small group of humans.  corrupted or not.

[Nhazwrath]

Don't worry about the coming PoW ban,
Worry about the utilities just cutting off power to the miners.  
A reasonable person might recognize the security implications of wasting so much energy.
Luckily their are no reasonable people supporting bitcoin.  

https://cointelegraph.com/news/quebec-s-energy-manager-to-seek-government-approval-to-stop-powering-crypto-miners

Quebec’s energy manager to seek government approval to stop powering crypto miners

According to a Nov. 3 tweet from Canadian lawmaker Pierre Fitzgibbon,
the government will request a decree from the energy board to release the company from its obligation to power crypto miners in the province.
Hydro-Québec allocated 270 megawatts toward the mining firms,
but electricity demand in Québec is expected to grow to a point that powering crypto will put pressure on the energy supplier.

The report Hydro-Québec filed with the government’s energy board on Nov. 1 said temporarily reducing the power provided to mining firms could help prevent threats to the “reliability and security” of energy for Québec residents.

Canada Winters are only 6 months, that mining will be cut in Canada.
So much for those ASICS earning back their purchase cost.
Better get on the phone to see if their are enough stupid Venture Capitalist left to float those PoW operation until spring.  

 

quebec has more hydroelectric power then just about anybody(thank a taxpayer)(james bay project)  and they sell a large amount of it to the states since they have waaay more capacity then load. 

[LegendaryK]

quebec has more hydroelectric power then just about anybody(thank a taxpayer)(james bay project)  and they sell a large amount of it to the states since they have waaay more capacity then load. 

It looks like they disagree with you about the capacity. 

http://nouvelles.hydroquebec.com/fr/communiques-de-presse/1884/la-croissance-de-la-demande-delectricite-se-poursuivra-au-quebec/

Request to suspend the allocation of electricity to the blockchain sector.

Finally, in this context of significant growth in electricity demand and tighter energy and power balance sheets,
Hydro-Québec submitted a request to the Régie de l'énergie concerning the suspension of the electricity to the blockchain sector.
According to this process, it was expected that approximately 270 MW would be allocated for near-term crypto use,
but allocating that amount of power to such use would put more pressure on balance sheets.