Staking is not as trustless as it used to be

[Abiky]

I remember the good-old days where you could stake coins like Peercoin and Blackcoin on your own node in a decentralized (trustless) manner. After ETH announced its intentions to become a PoS coin, those days are over. Most PoS coins require you to "lend" your coins to a validator or third-party for you to start earning income right away. ETH, Polkadot, Polygon, and many others now work this way. Isn't crypto's intended purpose to eliminate the middleman? By requiring trust in a PoS system, you're bringing back centralized banking to crypto. Money talks, so don't expect this to change anytime soon.

Do you think there's hope for PoS to become decentralized again? If not, why? Can we blame governments and VCs for the path PoS has taken lately? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

[deepblue01]

Now there is more urgent situation about energy. In this day Bitcoin alone is estimated to consume 127 terawatt-hours (TWh) a year for mining purpose.
There is more urgent discussion than this because we need to follow up stablecoin trend lately

[Wiwo]

Above all, the proof of stake (pos) has pushed front more centralization of the cryptocurrency markets such that, such that the highest liquidity providers control the confirmation of the transaction and this could lead to more control for high liquidity providers who may seize the network and choose which transaction get confirm or not, this give them full control over the security of transactions.

POShhas has not really achieved any positive miles stone because it has not helped the Ethereum blockchain in whatever way, even though pos promised to aid the scalability of the network.

[Blitzboy]

It's indeed a lamentable evolution that the promise of trustless staking in PoS systems seems to be eroding, replaced by these centralized validators. From a purely technical standpoint, this does shift the crypto landscape towards a pseudo-traditional banking model. The original appeal of crypto was the prospect of disrupting and redefining how value is stored and transacted. However, as with most developments, the implementation often does not align with the theoretical ideals.

The necessity of validators in PoS systems has been a technical compromise to address the issue of scalability and energy consumption found in PoW systems. Validators or staking pools also help smaller investors to participate in the staking and earning process. However, this doesn't necessarily condemn PoS to a future of centralization. Blockchain projects are tirelessly working towards innovative solutions. The introduction of sharding in Ethereum 2.0 and parachains in Polkadot are examples of this. There's a silver lining here; the sector is young, and the opportunity for evolution remains ripe.

[terencio]

I think there is hope for PoS to become more decentralized, if there is enough demand and innovation from the community. I don’t think we can blame governments and VCs for the path PoS has taken lately, but rather we should hold ourselves accountable for the choices we make as crypto users and investors.😊

[cabron]

Now there is more urgent situation about energy. In this day Bitcoin alone is estimated to consume 127 terawatt-hours (TWh) a year for mining purpose.
There is more urgent discussion than this because we need to follow up stablecoin trend lately

Let me guess you also believe Bitcoin destroys environment because miners dig holes to get BTC.

If POS tokens needs to be sent to a 3rd party in order for staking to take place, then it really is not safe. The 3rd party could sudenly just snap and confiscate all the tokens you staked and leave nothing for you.

I found one token that you need not to send to a 3rd party for you to stake, ADA.

[Bolivar_Tony]

Things changes as the years progress, I believe in the future, there will be a shift again to how these things will work, but there are many things to consider when it comes to POS and POW, the latter consumes a lot energy which it is not environmental friendly, also you asked your self, when the reward stops coming will people still able to support the network with the amount money they burn on energy?

[blockman]

Change is constant and despite being advocates of whole decentralization, we'll see these projects go near to the favor of the government instead of going with what the people requires.

Do you think there's hope for PoS to become decentralized again? If not, why? Can we blame governments and VCs for the path PoS has taken lately? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

There could be some hope but to whom? to what project? ETH is the most popular of them all and this is giving them the idea that if they go with this path, the government wouldn't be so harsh to the policies that they'll go through against them.

[killerfrost]

Perhaps we will know that POS is not completely decentralized or fully centralized. It can scale from partially centralized to a degree of decentralization depending on the implementation and design of each coin. Currently, however, most PoS coins are using a more centralized implementation that requires users to allow others to borrow their tokens to secure the network and receive rewards from censorship. transaction check. This can cause dependence on third parties and create re-centralization in the network. However, that is not the only reason. Some of the major PoS coins have developed with support from major financial institutions, including banks, and can therefore have a say in the design of implementation. Governments can also have influence over token management from a legal and tax standpoint.

In the future, there is hope for PoS to become more decentralized. Several PoS coins are working on more decentralized implementations, including removing reliance on third parties and creating new PoS models that could potentially help reduce centralization in the network. In addition, many crypto communities are emphasizing the importance of decentralization to help ensure transparency and integrity in the cryptocurrency system. In short, PoS becoming more decentralized is entirely possible, however, this depends on the design of each coin and the commitment of developers and the crypto community in building. build a decentralized and transparent network.

[merekamo]

Indeed, PoS introduces some level of centralization by requiring users to trust validators or third-party entities, it's important to note that not all PoS systems are created equal. I saw some individuals might hold hope that technological advancements or changes in the crypto landscape could lead to a more decentralized PoS model in the future.

Others may be skeptical, citing the influence of governments and venture capitalists (VCs) as factors that contribute to the current path PoS has taken. Some PoS networks strive to maintain a high degree of decentralization through mechanisms like validator rotation, delegation options, or protocol governance models that involve token holders.

[rat4]

Blackcoin

I still work on the good old PoS although under a new project name. At some point a leasing mechanism was added, but it's truthly optional. Right now a 5th upgrade of the protocol is being researched. You can check out the thread where BlackCoin was originally announced: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=469640.0

Do you think there's hope for PoS to become decentralized again?

Black them out.

[Doan9269]

Do you think there's hope for PoS to become decentralized again? If not, why?

PoS cannot be Decentralized any longer because it had long been making efforts to be the true colour of what it represents, anything that has to do with proof of stake must be under a central authority to sit and judge of the possible outcome and decisions concerning the currency, this is one of the reasons some believed that PoS can be manipulated while PoW cannot

Can we blame governments and VCs for the path PoS has taken lately?

Why should we blame the, are they the ones forcing this to be in place or the developers or inventors of each cryptocurrency, they have their own sitting panel that makes decision and concluded on what should be done, government will only regulate them and tax them from their end.

[hugeblack]

Not all proof-of-stake are centralized, as there are currencies that do not require the need for an intermediary such as Cardano, and therefore all proof-of-stake currencies that need a third party are those currencies that need large amounts such as more than 10k dollars, and most users will not be able to participate as a validator.

If you are POS hodler you must try to reach the limits of being a validator or using any other currency, otherwise everything that happens you increase the centralization of those currencies and thus increase the possibility of losing your currencies.

[JayTrain]

PoS has evolved in recent years, and while it has brought some centralization concerns, it also offers benefits like scalability and energy efficiency. While it may deviate from the original goal of decentralization, the crypto space is constantly evolving. It's crucial for the community to engage in discussions, advocate for decentralization, and explore innovative solutions that can maintain the core principles of cryptocurrency. By actively participating and supporting projects that prioritize decentralization, we can contribute to shaping the future of PoS and the broader crypto ecosystem

[hyudien]

Do you think there's hope for PoS to become decentralized again? If not, why? Can we blame governments and VCs for the path PoS has taken lately? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

When there are 2, 3 and so on parties that require us to entrust staking coins to other validators, then everything related to decentralization has been cut off. Today's PoS is worse, validators can stop the flow of bets at any time and are definitely not secure at all. I still believe in PoW and so far this option represents sole proprietorship of the owner and no interference from other parties. Highly oriented towards individual decisions to make a profit.

The role of the government cannot be blamed because from the start that was the goal, namely to gradually shift the principle of decentralization as if it had not changed under the guise of encouraging crypto adoption to a better era.

[Similificator]

I remember the good-old days where you could stake coins like Peercoin and Blackcoin on your own node in a decentralized (trustless) manner. After ETH announced its intentions to become a PoS coin, those days are over. Most PoS coins require you to "lend" your coins to a validator or third-party for you to start earning income right away. ETH, Polkadot, Polygon, and many others now work this way. Isn't crypto's intended purpose to eliminate the middleman? By requiring trust in a PoS system, you're bringing back centralized banking to crypto. Money talks, so don't expect this to change anytime soon.

Do you think there's hope for PoS to become decentralized again? If not, why? Can we blame governments and VCs for the path PoS has taken lately? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

It is really sad to see the direction where all of this is heading. Too bad though, we small investors/users cannot do much about this since it is what makes these things thrive despite the strict regulations. Two good things to be positive about this though is that it reduces scams and aids mass adoption even if it's just a little. Where PoS goes from here is something that we can only speculate about at the moment. Until we see favorable regulations for this industry, we really can't tell for sure. I'm keeping my hopes up though, since there are still a couple of people that are leaned more on privacy rather than just profits.

[btc_angela]

I remember the good-old days where you could stake coins like Peercoin and Blackcoin on your own node in a decentralized (trustless) manner. After ETH announced its intentions to become a PoS coin, those days are over. Most PoS coins require you to "lend" your coins to a validator or third-party for you to start earning income right away. ETH, Polkadot, Polygon, and many others now work this way. Isn't crypto's intended purpose to eliminate the middleman? By requiring trust in a PoS system, you're bringing back centralized banking to crypto. Money talks, so don't expect this to change anytime soon.

Do you think there's hope for PoS to become decentralized again? If not, why? Can we blame governments and VCs for the path PoS has taken lately? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Nah, I don't think that it will go back to where it used to be, unfortunately.

With the way the validators are making huge money (although it takes as well to invest a lot, but the returns are good). And with so many crypto investors willing to be a validator and everything now is a business? no one is willing to get back from the past. It's might not sound goods, but money matters has taken over the market already. Decentralization has been put aside, everyone is pursuing on how to get rich easy and quick right now. No more fighting about what is the principle of cyberpunks and why crypto is here in the first place.

[Yogee]

I think there is hope for PoS to become more decentralized, if there is enough demand and innovation from the community.

I wouldn't bet on that. Staking platforms have become business-centered nowadays and they don't want to lose that to some government regulators. They need to bend to their rules so these devs implement measures that would allow these regulators to monitor people's money and seized them if necessary.

I don’t think we can blame governments and VCs for the path PoS has taken lately, but rather we should hold ourselves accountable for the choices we make as crypto users and investors.😊

Government actions plays a huge role. Just take a look back at how Governments attacked POW and its "threat" to the environment. You can also check their actions that are against privacy.

[Bitstar_coin]

It is rarely about what crypto intended but what benefits the big whales more. The true nature of crypto as a decentralized asset is the ability to eliminate third parties but lately it is gradually shifting from that to passing through third party.
I think even before the eth pos announcement this was already in place and the eth pos solidify it.
And with many shitcoins having the staking option, it is hardly profitable to stake because the you will end up losing more than gaining imo.

[Abiky]

It's indeed a lamentable evolution that the promise of trustless staking in PoS systems seems to be eroding, replaced by these centralized validators. From a purely technical standpoint, this does shift the crypto landscape towards a pseudo-traditional banking model. The original appeal of crypto was the prospect of disrupting and redefining how value is stored and transacted. However, as with most developments, the implementation often does not align with the theoretical ideals.

The necessity of validators in PoS systems has been a technical compromise to address the issue of scalability and energy consumption found in PoW systems. Validators or staking pools also help smaller investors to participate in the staking and earning process. However, this doesn't necessarily condemn PoS to a future of centralization. Blockchain projects are tirelessly working towards innovative solutions. The introduction of sharding in Ethereum 2.0 and parachains in Polkadot are examples of this. There's a silver lining here; the sector is young, and the opportunity for evolution remains ripe.

Developers are making PoS cryptocurrencies similar to banks. By trusting a validator, you're trusting a third-party with your funds. Wasn't crypto meant to remove the middleman? I know there are some old coins around that can be staked in a trustless manner, but they're not as popular as their centralized counterparts. They're often low-valued and forgotten by the vast majority of traders and investors alike. You can see why good projects like Peercoin and Blackcoin aren't even mentioned anymore.

This is good for the government, because the increasing centralization of PoS coins will give them the ability to do anything they want against the revolution without any obstacles. They can simply target centralized exchanges and/or centralized staking pools to take down (or manipulate) the cryptocurrency of their preference for good. It's a dark future PoS is heading into, and there's nothing we can do about it.

I still work on the good old PoS although under a new project name. At some point a leasing mechanism was added, but it's truthly optional. Right now a 5th upgrade of the protocol is being researched. You can check out the thread where BlackCoin was originally announced: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=469640.0

Pretty cool. I'm excited to know there's still someone working on good-old fashioned PoS to help preserve decentralization and censorship-resistance. I was heavily invested in Blackcoin within my early days of crypto, but I've switched to other coins after BLK went all the way down the drain in market price. This cryptocurrency, alongside Peercoin (PPC), Diamond (DMD), and Magi (XMG) are my favorites. Can't wait to see what's next in store for the rewamped version of the Blackcoin project.