Bitcoin Monetary Policy But Things are Changing Now (Taproot)

[pooya87]

Well said, I know it's nearly impossible for the Bitcoin community to accept any type of POW to POS solution in the future.

If some day a new algorithm is invented that at least provides the security that PoW provides and offers enough advantages over it, I don't see any reason for bitcoin to not switch to that new algorithm. The thing is, we already know that PoS is severely flawed and adds more problems than it solves. This is why talking about such a switch is more like a joke. After all PoS was invented in ~2012 and failed then and there.

[1715080842]

1715080842

[Hamza2424]

Well said, I know it's nearly impossible for the Bitcoin community to accept any type of POW to POS solution in the future.

If some day a new algorithm is invented that at least provides the security that PoW provides and offers enough advantages over it, I don't see any reason for bitcoin to not switch to that new algorithm. The thing is, we already know that PoS is severely flawed and adds more problems than it solves. This is why talking about such a switch is more like a joke. After all PoS was invented in ~2012 and failed then and there.

I was thinking in another way I would like to know what you think of the decentralization of the network with POS and POW because it is very clear that both have +1 points one is power efficient and the other is efficient in terms of security. Regarding the new switch we are talking about can you please elaborate on DPOS and Hybrid POw/POs are kind of such things which I have gone through theoretically but I am not sure where these machines are implemented. For Dpos I think EOS is based on DPOS.

Rest I would like yo know what senior thinks about it and why still we are unable to find such a solution..

[hd49728]

I was thinking in another way I would like to know what you think of the decentralization of the network with POS and POW because it is very clear that both have +1 points one is power efficient and the other is efficient in terms of security. Regarding the new switch we are talking about can you please elaborate on DPOS and Hybrid POw/POs are kind of such things which I have gone through theoretically but I am not sure where these machines are implemented. For Dpos I think EOS is based on DPOS.

Proof of Work is better than Proof of Stake as it requires physical resources to create new coins into circulating supply. With Proof of Stake, you can create new coins or tokens by investing in a node (Masternode, Supernode, Security Node, etc.) or amount of some coins or tokens and stake yours on network to earn staking rewards. It can be hacked, exploited to vote new Proposal. This algorithm makes such networks based on it is less secured and more vulnerable to exploitation.

The hybrid model PoW/ PoS is not new but we need to see it on big altcoins to know how good or bad it is in reality and on big main nets.

[Hamza2424]

Proof of Work is better than Proof of Stake as it requires physical resources to create new coins into circulating supply. With Proof of Stake, you can create new coins or tokens by investing in a node (Masternode, Supernode, Security Node, etc.) or amount of some coins or tokens and stake yours on the network to earn staking rewards. It can be hacked, exploited to vote new Proposal. This algorithm makes such networks based on it is less secure and more vulnerable to exploitation.

The hybrid model PoW/ PoS is not new but we need to see it on big altcoins to know how good or bad it is in reality and on big main nets.

Well, I do agree with you that POW is better in the circulation supply management but I am discussing a point which is that one both models there is a controlled environment such as on the POW side the compute resources owners control the blockchain and on the POS side the Money holders control the market. A middleman like me who doesn't have many resources and Money can't contribute to blockchain decentralization because of these models.

Also, POW is directly targeted for its power consumption which is a big issue for the Bitcoin community, But we always neglect it. Some experts who support centralization and traditional markets target this point to prove Bitcoin is unworthy. The community is sticking to its ideology and continuously supporting good Bitcoin. This a sign for a big reform but what if we consider a solution for  Bitcoin power consumption?

[justdimin]

I do agree with you that POW is better in the circulation supply management but I am discussing a point which is that one both models there is a controlled environment such as on the POW side the compute resources owners control the blockchain and on the POS side the Money holders control the market. A middleman like me who doesn't have many resources and Money can't contribute to blockchain decentralization because of these models.

Also, POW is directly targeted for its power consumption which is a big issue for the Bitcoin community, But we always neglect it. Some experts who support centralization and traditional markets target this point to prove Bitcoin is unworthy. The community is sticking to its ideology and continuously supporting good Bitcoin. This a sign for a big reform but what if we consider a solution for  Bitcoin power consumption?

Maybe it doesn't have to be like that? Maybe you do not have to join in the blockchain part of it. Just because it is decentralized, doesn't mean that we need to be the ones who are in charge for it, and we can just watch afar while supporting it and buying it.

Basically I have zero miners, never owned any, and I know that I don't have 32 eth to start helping with the PoS there for example, but I know that they are both decentralized and that's good enough for me. I do not need it to be something that I participate in order to make sure that it's decentralized, I can accept it the way it is right now and that's good enough for me, I just buy and vote with my money by holding the coins.