Replacement for POW

[LegendaryK]

@n0nce,

Dude ,
you live in a parallel universe to the one, that I and the majority here live in,
where the laws of physics and economics are mirrored version,
In your universe , PoW will be just fine.    
Sarcasm

the adaption will be the development of fusion supplemented by solar driven by the need for power to mine pow.
POS = power of survival
it is simple an unregulated bond backed by nothing.

If you can get a working commercial fusion reactor within 2 years then you can keep your proof of waste,
however fusion is 50 to 70 years from being useful to the global populace.
I say 2 years, because that is maybe how much time is left before the Global PoW bans.
Good Luck to you on it.

You like to say bitcoin is based on energy, an insanely large wasted amount of energy , but energy at it's core.
Let's take ethereum for example, the majority of it's coins were also created by wasteful PoW,
so it is also based on energy, it has just moved to a more efficient network model that does not waste energy.
Now let's take cardano, it's coins were also created by energy, except the energy used to create it coins was infinitesimal compared to a PoW coin.
And yet the energy efficient coins have greater onchain transaction capacity and lower network costs and smart contract capabilities, of which your btc PoW lacks.
So here is the shocker for you a PoS coin was created with energy, so therefore that coin is also backed by energy, just not enough wasted energy that could have powered 47000 homes.  

Tell someone making $13 per day that they can be a bitcoin miner.

Lol. Tell them to stake then. Oh wait, they can't. That requires you to have a shitload amount of money; you hand over custody otherwise.  

Pop!
That was me bursting your bubble, $13 and less of PoS coins can stake, depending on the coin you may need to pool with others.
Now how many millions of dollars of asics are required so that a PoW miner does not need to pool?
How many PoW coin holders don't have custody, the majority.

The N@S Myth, that has yet to occur, reasons why it does not occur is

And a 51% has yet to occur, but you're the one who's asserted that it will sometime. You're contradicting yourself.

Nope , you're just playing stupid, or maybe you not playing.  

I listed technical reasons why the Myth called N@S can't actually occur,
there are no technical reasons why BTC can't suffer from a PoW 51% pool attack because 3 mining operators decide to collude and make more money crashing the btc ecosystem.

I am not the only one warning about the dangers of allowing pools to gain a high  % of the hashrate that make collusion so easy.
But if you want PoW to have a closer equivalent of protection from 51% pool attacks as PoS has from the N@S BS.
Have the BTC PoW programmers get off their lazy asses and update the code, so that no PoW mining pool can have over 1% of the total hashrate,
this would insure that you would need at least 51 people to collude to 51% pool attack , which is a hell of a lot better than the current 3.
FYI: Cardano PoS Network already have program code which prevents pooling attacks and they have over 3000 pools.

Did you just admit that your preferred PoS coins not only aren't usable without leaking your IP address (terrible for privacy) and that you can just blacklist addresses? These are terrible features for a decentralized digital currency!

Not in Legendary's fantastic, not dystopian at all world where the government knows the best for every individual. Privacy is just an illusion. You think you need it. You don't. Period.

Please don't tell me you are one of the clueless, that believe you are safe behind Tor (created by the US Navy for dumb people to feel hidden.)
Your IP is traceable as long as you are running any type of node software, PoS or PoW or mining with an ASIC.

In your pretend world where Tor and VPN are untraceable, why no one can find you or your ip.  More Sarcasm.  

[1714328929]

1714328929

[1714328929]

1714328929

[1714328929]

1714328929

[tromp]

Now let's take cardano, it's coins were also created by energy

Wrong; they were created by grift.

Cardano just greedily assigned themselves 100% of all coins and started selling some portion to the gullible.

A major part of being decentralized is to decentralize ownership. Premines run counter to that.

PoS further runs counter to that since it lets everyone just hang on to their share.

[LegendaryK]

Now let's take cardano, it's coins were also created by energy

Wrong; they were created by grift.

Cardano just greedily assigned themselves 100% of all coins and started selling some portion to the gullible.

A major part of being decentralized is to decentralize ownership. Premines run counter to that.

PoS further runs counter to that since it lets everyone just hang on to their share.

So buying Cardano at less that 30 cents, offends your sense of fair play.

But paying $64K to greedy PoW miners causing global energy problems, that is good with you.  
Please don't pretend that the entire world knew of btc so they could all start mining at the same time,
if that were true satoshi mining address would not have 1,125,150 bitcoins in it and that is just the one we know of.
Like he did not have others, where he profited greatly.  
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-public-address-key-of-Sathoshi-Nakamoto

Satoshi had at least 22000 bitcoin addresses because he used to generate a new address for each mining reward in order to keep his anonymity.

I have seen plenty of new PoW coins created in 2012, and the one thing I noticed is that none had a fair distribution.
Look at all of the people now, they can't even afford to mine btc , so spare me your moral outrage, you have no high ground to stand on.
More like you are standing in quicksand.

At least with a premine, they are informing you up front.
Another thing I noticed, the majority of those 2012 PoW coins died.
So PoW is not the savior you think it is.

Normal people can afford to stake and participate in a PoS network,
Normal people can't afford to lose money mining in a PoW network.

FYI:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/five-reasons-why-bitcoin-wealth-155752613.html

Shock horror: Bitcoin’s wealth distribution is outrageously uneven.
The top 2.8 percent of wallet addresses control 95 percent of the supply of bitcoin

Thinking PoW promoted fair distribution of coins, is just pure bullshit.

[tromp]

I have seen plenty of new PoW coins created in 2012, and the one thing I noticed is that none had a fair distribution.
Look at all of the people now, they can't even afford to mine btc , so spare me your moral outrage, you have no high ground to stand on.

Thinking PoW promoted fair distribution of coins, is just pure bullshit.

Fair distribution *requires* PoW. But PoW is not enough. Premines reduce fairness. 100% premines as in PoS reduce it to nothing. As you noticed, reward halvings also reduce fairness.
If Bitcoin didn't have any halvings, it would be as fair as can be expected.
It would no longer have a hard supply cap. But that is not as big a deal as people think [1].

[1] https://john-tromp.medium.com/a-case-for-using-soft-total-supply-1169a188d153

[NotATether]

Tell someone making $13 per day that they can be a bitcoin miner.

Lol. Tell them to stake then. Oh wait, they can't. That requires you to have a shitload amount of money; you hand over custody otherwise.  

Pop!
That was me bursting your bubble, $13 and less of PoS coins can stake, depending on the coin you may need to pool with others.

Just because you can waste money doesn't mean you should.

[in case you did not get the point, depositing $13 with a high-risk staker is essentially yield farming. An industry that has been hammered during the past 6 months.]

Please don't tell me you are one of the clueless, that believe you are safe behind Tor (created by the US Navy for dumb people to feel hidden.)

If the Navy could break it, nobody would use it.
If they can't, then that point is irrelevant.

[philipma1957]

Now let's take cardano, it's coins were also created by energy

Wrong; they were created by grift.

Cardano just greedily assigned themselves 100% of all coins and started selling some portion to the gullible.

A major part of being decentralized is to decentralize ownership. Premines run counter to that.

PoS further runs counter to that since it lets everyone just hang on to their share.

So buying Cardano at less that 30 cents, offends your sense of fair play.

But paying $64K to greedy PoW miners causing global energy problems, that is good with you.  
Please don't pretend that the entire world knew of btc so they could all start mining at the same time,
if that were true satoshi mining address would not have 1,125,150 bitcoins in it and that is just the one we know of.
Like he did not have others, where he profited greatly.  
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-public-address-key-of-Sathoshi-Nakamoto

Satoshi had at least 22000 bitcoin addresses because he used to generate a new address for each mining reward in order to keep his anonymity.

I have seen plenty of new PoW coins created in 2012, and the one thing I noticed is that none had a fair distribution.
Look at all of the people now, they can't even afford to mine btc , so spare me your moral outrage, you have no high ground to stand on.
More like you are standing in quicksand.

At least with a premine, they are informing you up front.
Another thing I noticed, the majority of those 2012 PoW coins died.
So PoW is not the savior you think it is.

Normal people can afford to stake and participate in a PoS network,
Normal people can't afford to lose money mining in a PoW network.

FYI:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/five-reasons-why-bitcoin-wealth-155752613.html

Shock horror: Bitcoin’s wealth distribution is outrageously uneven.
The top 2.8 percent of wallet addresses control 95 percent of the supply of bitcoin

Thinking PoW promoted fair distribution of coins, is just pure bullshit.

Actually Doge has no 1/2ings and has a slow steady descending rate of inflation and has the best POW solution to be in alignment with long term development of Fusion power.

year 1 x coins
year 2 2x coins 100% inflation
...
year 10 10x coins
year 11 11x coins 10% inflation
...
year 20 20x coins
year 21 21x coins 5% inflation
...
year 50 50x coins
year 51 51x coins 2% inflation           
...
year 100 100x coins
year 101 101x coins 1% inflation



Your entire argument is pinned on shrinkage.

you are much like the marvel villain Thanos lets ½ the universes entire population to save resources


and the moron had a  perfect  solution all he need to did is copy antman and shrink all the universe people 1/10 size far bette method with no killing.

We now have our antman moment  in that fusion works and you are running around and saying lets kill off pow.

meanwhile all the power pow mining uses is under the city of Tehran power use.

check it out.  So lets kill off POW which uses less power than Tehran does is a typical Thanos move over kill when better solutions are already available.

How about Christmas lighting we should ban that right.

while we are at it lets ban every movie theater that is not 80% filled.

I could go on an on and on.

Lets throttle every ac to 78f. you do not need to be cooler than that. BTW this alone fixes the power used by POW

Oh I know ban fucking for 2 years.  Just blow jobs and muff diving  no babies born for 2 years saves tons of power.

Should I go on.


SO Doge fixes your unfair distribution issues

and I have endless power saving that are better than pow getting killed off.

[tromp]

Actually Doge has no 1/2ings and has a slow steady descending rate of inflation and has the best POW solution to be in alignment with long term development of Fusion power.

Doge did have big reward reductions throughout its first year.
Current rewards (fixed since year 2) are 50x less than at launch.

Only one coin had a fixed reward from launch, 1 coin per second forever [1].

[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5429497

[BlackHatCoiner]

[...]

You're a confused, pro-authoritarian, brainwashed, altcoin shiller, and I think I'll just stop talking to you, because you're an actual energy waste.

Fair distribution *requires* PoW.

"Ask 10 people what's fairness, and you get 11 responses". I don't find Proof-of-Work neither fair nor unfair for coin distribution, but if I were to choose, I'd go with fair. But, that's just me. You might find it unfair to have halvings, because the future users have less chances to acquire the same as today. I personally find unfair to have premined coins, because I only find fair to have zero economic sources during the beginning of a currency, and pre-miners have an irrational economic advantage.

If Bitcoin didn't have any halvings, it would be as fair as can be expected.

By the same reasoning, bitcoin would be even fairer than that, if in each block the subsidy was slightly increased (50, 50.01..., 50.02...), to maintain inflation rate constant.

[garlonicon]

By the same reasoning, bitcoin would be even fairer than that, if in each block the subsidy was slightly increased (50, 50.01..., 50.02...), to maintain inflation rate constant.

1. It is possible to increase future block rewards by sending coins to "<blockNumber> OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY OP_DROP OP_TRUE". Because the whole system is about proportions, there is no need to touch 21 million coins limit, it is a matter of distributing existing coins in whatever way it is needed. And that means, formulas from point 2 and 3 can be rewritten to leave that limit intact.
2. Using constant block reward, and halving it every four years, is way easier than inventing some formula for every block. Also, if it would be "50*(2^(-(blockNumber/210000)))", it would be much harder to calculate. Because then, you would have 50 BTC in the Genesis Block, then 49.99983496 BTC in the first block, ..., 35.35533905 BTC in the 105,000th block, ..., and 25 BTC in the 210,000th block.
3. You can have a constant inflation rate of p%, if you introduce "(p/100)*currentSupply" coins in every block. So, if you want to have 1% inflation rate, then you would have 50 BTC in the Genesis Block (then, because it is unspendable, you will avoid a huge drop from 100% to p%), then 0.5 BTC in the first block, then 0.505 BTC in the second block, and so on. Basically, it would be just a geometric progression with "1+p/100" ratio.

You might find it unfair to have halvings, because the future users have less chances to acquire the same as today.

They invested in hard times. After financial crisis from 2008. And when many different (centralized) electronical currencies failed, so people were very skeptical from the very beginning. During those times, people were very happy to sell 10k BTC for a pizza. Also note that there were no tools, and people had no idea that what they can see in version 0.1.0 in the GUI, is not everything. They didn't know about block explorers, and about checking other transactions than their own. They had to use Windows. They had no idea about the Script. Imagine that you see some altcoin, and it looks like version 0.1.0, you have no source code on January 3rd 2009, and you can get any after few days (and it takes some time to compile it properly, to understand it, to start making any changes, so it is a black box for days or even months). Would you invest in such altcoin today? So, I think those people fully deserve it, because they had very little knowledge about all of those things, and they put their money into it.

Also, Proof of Work was something entirely new, that makes things tick. You cannot get rid of PoW and reach the same system, because humans don't know, how to create a better proof. Staking means you can overwrite the whole chain with signatures, so there is no work behind it. Burning means you have the same case as with staking, but you cannot unstake anything (and it is what ETH currently has, as a "de facto consensus", as long as people cannot unfreeze coins). Checking other things like hard disk capacity is just moving the same problem into different field, so it is just "obscured PoW". So far, we don't have any better proof than Proof of Work, and it is part of the whole success, if there would be some different consensus, then there could be no such thing as "a cryptocurrency", we would have another centralized systems instead, similar to the old Chaumian mint.

The whole decentralization that comes from Proof of Work is so strong, that we still cannot remove testnet3, and switch entirely to some signet, just because signet mining is too centralized, and then we couldn't test easily, what would happen after many halvings. And even in signet, we still need some Proof of Work, just to keep some properties, like "the history that is hard to overwrite". That means, if we want to make a better system, we should think more about reusing Proof of Work, than about replacing it. Merged Mining is one option, experimenting with second layers, with PoW on the first layer, is another. As long as we don't have better proofs, we need Proof of Work on the first layer, to protect that system from collapsing.

[werghb4562]

Personally , I see PoW as a ridiculous outdated design , that should be thrown out as soon as possible.

Personally, I see pos as a ridiculously outdated design. Visa is faster, cheaper, more efficient than any pos scamcoin can ever be.

if that were true satoshi mining address would not have 1,125,150 bitcoins

You pulled that lie from your ass. No such address exists.

Please don't pretend that the entire world knew of btc so they could all start mining at the same time,

Premined pos scamcoins don't solve the early mining problem. For example buterin's pos scamcoin suffers from a gigantic premine and early mining.

[LegendaryK]

you are much like the marvel villain Thanos lets ½ the universes entire population to save resources

Actually Doge has the best PoW solution

and I have endless power saving that are better than pow getting killed off.

Actually Thanos is the World Government threatening the PoW ban.

My role is (Kronos the Time Keeper) telling you naysayers, time is running out, and if don't want PoS, you better come up with another plan.
Confusion about who your real enemy is, is why btc future is dim.

Also confusion about the timeline for fusion to make a difference, is pure fantasy.
Nuclear Fission is the best , you are going to see in your remaining time here.
And that is a 10 year build time.  

FYI: Also sound like you're more in favor of Doge than btc.
https://cointelegraph.com/dogecoin-for-beginners/dogecoin-transition-from-proof-of-work-to-proof-of-stake-why-is-it-important

Dogecoin released their updated trail map, detailing a plan regarding Dogecoin transition from PoW to PoS.

Writings on the wall , everyone sees it but btc PoW cult members.


@BlackHatCoiner
I stand corrected, you are not pretending to be stupid, you actually are stupid.  

Just because you can waste money doesn't mean you should.

BTC $64K-$17K = a loss of $47000 ,
What was that about waste money again.  

Please don't tell me you are one of the clueless, that believe you are safe behind Tor (created by the US Navy for dumb people to feel hidden.)

If the Navy could break it, nobody would use it.
If they can't, then that point is irrelevant.

If the Navy could have made tor work, they would not have released it into open source.  
They would have kept it for the military.

You know why the Navy did not give you a Battleship, it's because the battleships they build work.  

So how many hours per day is your power off now, NotATether.

Personally, I see pos as a ridiculously outdated design. Visa is faster, cheaper, more efficient than any pos scamcoin can ever be.

And you be wrong,
Ethereum is moving toward 100000 transactions per second and takes 1½ minutes to complete.
Visa cards can only process   24000 transactions per second and take 48 hours to complete.
Read more, spew bad info less.  

if that were true satoshi mining address would not have 1,125,150 bitcoins

You pulled that lie from your ass. No such address exists.

Reading comprehension is really not your strong suit.
https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2020/07/20/whale-alert-identifies-1125-million-btc-as-satoshis-stash/

New on-chain analysis from Whale Alert says Bitcoin’s anonymous creator Satoshi Nakamoto mined an estimated 1,125,150 BTC, now worth an estimated $10.9 billion.
In a Medium post, researchers describe how Satoshi continued mining with the same rig until at least May 2010.

And they have no idea how many coins he mined after he switched rigs.  

Please don't pretend that the entire world knew of btc so they could all start mining at the same time,

Premined pos scamcoins don't solve the early mining problem. For example buterin's pos scamcoin suffers from a gigantic premine and early mining.

Are you really so clueless, that you don't know ethereum only switched to PoS this year.
So you should have said:
For example buterin's PoW scamcoin suffers from a gigantic premine and early mining.
By switching to PoS, he repents for the earlier mistake in using Proof of Waste.
FYI:Proof of Stake coins Stake only crappy Proof of Waste networks mine.
No worries, PoW coins are dying so fast , it won't be a problem for much longer.
Doge evolves to PoS to survive and thrive, while ltc and btc crash and burn at the worldwide PoW ban.
And Energy Efficient Life goes on and those very few PoW coins that refuse to adapt to their environment die.  

[WhyFhy]

OP It's been discussed here time and time again.

The final conclusion is generally it can't be done without something like the lightning network piggy backpacking it
 to make it more PoS, but its still PoW at the end of the day.

Or something new entirely.

And LegendaryK
POW will be around for a while.
Check out ancillary grid balancing services.
Some of these ancillary grid balancers are necessary for irregular conditions.
You generally have 3 options.

1. Waste (Going to happen Irregardless)

2. Mining for correction
3. Battery banking for correction

Mining looks bad on the surface but compared to battery banking it's a godsend and a lot easier to manage.
https://www.ercot.com/gridmktinfo/dashboards/ancillaryservices

You've mentioned Texas as a example. Based on your post history looks like you live here since its the grid you keep referring to..

A few snowstorms we haven't seen in decades and an unprepared grid are factors in your theory,
what about the new residents moving here, 750,000 new households a year couldn't possibly have anything to do with it, could it?

You're simply ranting on in spite of what? You're trying to connect dots that aren't there.

You've disrespected people here that have simply tried to help educate you?
Seems like you may be going through some stuff, try approaching a little less bitter it's not a bad community.

If bitcoin where to be banned, it would be to make way for CBDC, potentially scapegoated as an energy crisis however saner minds will prevail.
but that's speculative, bitcoins been lobbied pretty hard, probably harder than anything in history.
It's even on programming via NFL crypto.com

“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”
-William Casey, CIA Director 1981-1987



 

[LegendaryK]

You're simply ranting on in spite of what? You're trying to connect dots that aren't there.

You've disrespected people here that have simply tried to help educate you?
Seems like you may be going through some stuff, try approaching a little less bitter it's not a bad community.

If bitcoin where to be banned, it would be to make way for CBDC, potentially scapegoated as an energy crisis however saner minds will prevail.
but that's speculative, bitcoins been lobbied pretty hard, probably harder than anything in history.
It's even on programming via NFL crypto.com

When the white house receives a report recommending that PoW be banned/eliminated to the sitting president,
you need someone to connect the dots, when it should literally have slapped you in the face.

I have disrespected no one that has been civil,
the ones that have not been civil , have received what they were due.

CBDC is coming , again if you bothered to read, instead of looking for dots and not comprehending ,
US Banks are already testing CBDC, and the rollout to the public will be middle of 2023, no matter what happens in the rest of crypto.
And that has nothing to do with the instability PoW miners cause on the power grids,
try and strain your brain , and for one second, imagine that all of the news articles stating grid instability and PoW bans, have nothing to do with anything except the danger to the power grids.

Oh and when I warn of the security dangers of allowing the mining pools now down to 3 that can 51% attack,
people have been warning of the pool dangers for years, nothing new except it used to be 5, then 4, now 3, and soon 2 or even 1 pool operator,
because the btc community refuses to apply a simple code update to limit pool % of the hashrate.

You can whine, if I tell you smoke detectors and a fire extinguisher would be good to have in place.
Ignore that info and if your house burns down, you realize how big a fool you are for refusing to take simple precautions.
Same as BTC, I and others tell you that high % of hashrate in the hands of the very few is dangerous and make a 51% easy,
also warn you that the world governments are talking PoW Bans, because of PoW miners causing the grids to be unstable and using up the majority of energy.
Do you prepare for the coming government onslaught by making your miners able to hide or regulate them into compliance or even move them offshore to your own island with your own non-public power source, nope, which is why you are playing the fool.

FYI: Read so you can be educated.
https://cointelegraph.com/news/new-york-governor-signs-pow-mining-moratorium-into-law
https://www.theverge.com/2022/7/14/23206795/bitcoin-crypto-mining-electricity-texas-grid-energy-bills-emissions
https://cryptopotato.com/white-house-report-recommends-banning-bitcoin-mining-to-slash-ghg-emissions/
https://fortune.com/2022/01/05/crypto-blackouts-bitcoin-mining-bans-kosovo-iran-kazakhstan-iceland/
https://fortune.com/2021/11/17/china-bitcoin-mining-ban-crypto-holdouts-ether-solana-price/
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/13/world/europe/eu-carbon-tax-law-imports.html
https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/financial-stability/macroprudential-bulletin/html/ecb.mpbu202207_3~d9614ea8e6.en.html


For the bitcoin cultists.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-human-beast/201208/why-cults-are-mindless

Mindless obedience keeps religious cults together.

To hell with Reality,
decentralize, hodl, moon, whenlambo crys the btc PoW cultists,   

To all PoW fools that think btc will last, Enjoy it while you can.
Now spread your nonsense that PoW will endure, while the sane laugh at you from afar while shorting your btc into nothingness.  
Because cult members get so boring, with their inability to recognize their actual surroundings.

PoW supporters have wasted enough of my time.

So I bid you Good Day to await your fate.  

[BlackHatCoiner]

1. It is possible to increase future block rewards by sending coins to "<blockNumber> OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY OP_DROP OP_TRUE".

That's like loaning for future operation. The problem is that after <blockNumber>, you still have low rewards, and you've already taken the past loan, so you can't do it again.

Because then, you would have 50 BTC in the Genesis Block, then 49.99983496 BTC in the first block, ..., 35.35533905 BTC in the 105,000th block, ..., and 25 BTC in the 210,000th block.

Doesn't seem bad to me. What's an indirect disadvantage with rewarding in that manner?

Would you invest in such altcoin today? So, I think those people fully deserve it, because they had very little knowledge about all of those things, and they put their money into it.

I'll be honest, if I had heard of bitcoin in 2009, I wouldn't have given much attention (for the reasons you outlined). But if I had taken a look in 2010-2011, in the golden years, when its source code was available, it had some serious talking, mailing lists were active, I might have had some, just in case it catches on. But that was bitcoin. I wouldn't invest into any altcoin, because it is apparent that it wouldn't have the same impact.

Well said.

[garlonicon]

The problem is that after <blockNumber>, you still have low rewards, and you've already taken the past loan, so you can't do it again.

You can. It is possible to lock coins for a block 1000000, then 1000001, then 1000002, and so on. Also note that non-upgraded nodes won't pick it, so that kind of locktime means "this block or later", and this "or later" part is quite important, because if there are rules to always lock something, then it may be endlessly moved. Also, you can look at RSK, and see, that it is possible to distribute fees more smoothly.

What's an indirect disadvantage with rewarding in that manner?

It is difficult to code it properly, and to understand from the start, how it should look like. Also, it means there could be some problems related to floating point numbers, and to rounding them correctly. Because of course it is possible to use integers, and calculate everything in satoshis, but it is not obvious. When you see 0x5a827999, you don't recognize it instantly as sqrt(2), written as uint32.

Also, when you look at SHA-256 implementation, you won't see k-values that are computed on-the-fly every time. You see a huge table of constants. And miners would then need such tables for block rewards, because they don't want to take risk that their block will be invalid, because they took one more satoshi than they should.

But if I had taken a look in 2010-2011, in the golden years, when its source code was available, it had some serious talking, mailing lists were active, I might have had some, just in case it catches on.

Exactly, there were some signals that it might catch on. And now, there are no signals that something else than Proof of Work may catch on. It is the opposite: there are signs of weaknesses in Proof of Stake, which is why ETH has "de facto Proof of Burn". If people could unstake coins now, it would be a disaster. But now, that cure can be worse than the illness, because burning means that after reaching 51%, there will be no way to unstake those coins, and fix the situation, so they will be forced to use another hard-fork.

I wouldn't invest into any altcoin, because it is apparent that it wouldn't have the same impact.

And imagine that there could be some altcoin, that would have Bitcoin-compatible mining, so you could mine both at the same time. What then? It is hard to know upfront, what will be successful or not. Because NameCoin did it wrong, and the path for Merged Mining is not closed, as long as "Instead of fragmentation, networks share and augment each other's total CPU power" is still not true. As long as each network has its own difficulty, instead of following the strongest difficulty, and changing amount of coins, it is very hard to trace all attacks and react to them correctly. So, I think people deserve those gains, because it was like investing in altcoins today: there were some positive signs, but nobody knew the future. Not to mention about testnet3, that is better at allocating names than NameCoin, because test coins are considered worthless, so they can only be used for sharing public information, like names and some test results.

[BlackHatCoiner]

You can. It is possible to lock coins for a block 1000000, then 1000001, then 1000002, and so on.

But that's a miner task, because money sent to such script is money that is sooner or later acquired by a miner. Therefore such action of locking coins to future blocks should be done by miners, for their future operation. My question is: why would miners loan money to themselves, when they can individually earn more?

I might have not understood you. You're proposing to have less reward now, and more in the future, right?

When you see 0x5a827999, you don't recognize it instantly as sqrt(2), written as uint32.

Why should you represent a double as int?

[garlonicon]

Why should you represent a double as int?

Because a number of satoshis is an integer. And because you have halvings every 210,000 blocks, so in the 105,000th block, you would need sqrt(2) to do that properly. Even worse, you would need 2^(-1/210000) as your multiplier, which means representing 0.999996699305... precisely enough for each block, and rounding that down correctly. Currently, we have floating-point value called "difficulty", and it is recalculated every 2016 blocks. It is far from perfect, and has three bytes of precision (plus one byte for offset), for amounts we have eight bytes. Doing such calculation for every block could lead to more errors.

But that's a miner task, because money sent to such script is money that is sooner or later acquired by a miner.

Everyone can do that, it is standard, as long as it is wrapped in P2WSH or P2TR. But yes, it could be raw script, then it would be clearly visible by everyone, and spendable only by miners.

My question is: why would miners loan money to themselves, when they can individually earn more?

It depends if you want to change the current system or not. Because if you want that, and you want that on BTC, then it can be only done in some backward-compatible way, as a soft-fork, or a no-fork. Because if you want to start a new system, then you should reuse existing coins, and rely only on coins explicitly moved by users, in other case you will reach an altcoin, that will have no peg with BTC.

Also note that miners in the past accepted new rules, where minimal fees were lower, and they reached 1000 satoshis per kilobyte. In the same way, they can prefer including a transaction with minimal fees, that sends some coins to some timelocked-only address, than other transaction, with the same fee and size, that does not include anything like that.

[NotATether]

When you see 0x5a827999, you don't recognize it instantly as sqrt(2), written as uint32.

Why should you represent a double as int?

You can represent some irrational numbers in the base-10 and base-2 system exactly, by using a floating-point configuration with a different base, which would allow you to write it as an integer for example.

[werghb4562]

And you be wrong, Ethereum is moving toward 100000 transactions per second and takes 1½ minutes to complete.

You're comparing what visa can do now to what buterin claims his scamcoin might be able to do in the future. Centralized ledgers pretending to be decentralized can do as many tps as their scam founder wants it to do. The only thing holding them back is the decentralization theater needed to differentiate their scam from ledgers that are honest about their centralization like visa.

Reading comprehension is really not your strong suit.
https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2020/07/20/whale-alert-identifies-1125-million-btc-as-satoshis-stash/

You're doubling down on your bullshit lie. You said "address". An address is singular. No address with 1,125,150 bitcoin exists.

And they have no idea how many coins he mined after he switched rigs.

You have no idea how many coins buterin mined after he premined 72,000,000 a gigantic 60% of the current supply.

Are you really so clueless, that you don't know ethereum only switched to PoS this year.
So you should have said:
For example buterin's PoW scamcoin suffers from a gigantic premine and early mining.
By switching to PoS, he repents for the earlier mistake in using Proof of Waste.

It is literally impossible for coins to be distributed fairly without pow. Starting with pos requires a 100% premine. The only place where proof of 100% premined stake is decentralized is in the scammer decentralization theater.

[philipma1957]

 Dragging up this thread. eth is discussing staking at 2048 coins not 32

https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/06/19/ethereum-developers-propose-raising-validator-limit-to-2048-ether-from-32-ether/


and that is why POS is piece of shit

the very idea they have the balls to talk about doing that shows how fucked up staking can be.