Which Proof of Stake System is the Most Viable

[Brangdon]

Sounds like he want to pick DaT's brain.

That's more or less what he said: that he wants public review of the ideas planned for Nxt. As seems sensible.

If he had a solid solution he would be releasing without the fanfare.  Just my opinion.

He says he's concerned about clones. Also, some of this stuff depends on a robust ecosystem, which isn't in place yet, but hopefully will grow over the next few months.

(I'm not saying I agree with this approach, but I can see the sense of it, and there's no doubt the Nxt developers have delivered in other areas.)

[jonald_fyookball]

Sounds like he want to pick DaT's brain.

That's more or less what he said: that he wants public review of the ideas planned for Nxt. As seems sensible.

If he had a solid solution he would be releasing without the fanfare.  Just my opinion.

He says he's concerned about clones. Also, some of this stuff depends on a robust ecosystem, which isn't in place yet, but hopefully will grow over the next few months.

(I'm not saying I agree with this approach, but I can see the sense of it, and there's no doubt the Nxt developers have delivered in other areas.)

No he wanted to PRIVATELY consult.

If he wants public review, why doesn't he just post here.

[Brangdon]

What is interesting to me is that in the (IMO very unlikely) event that Nxt has technical promise, then as soon as the code is open-source it will be possible to create Nxt-clone using the spin-off mechanism and immediately bootstrap the clone with a more efficient distribution than Nxt-original.  

As I understand it, the Nxt code is modular. The core, including the PoS stuff, will be open-source, but some of the services built on top will not be. The Nxt devs believe a lot of their value is in the services - things like the Asset Exchange. So the clone won't include all of Nxt.

Also, the Bitcoin distribution isn't all that fantastic. It has its whales. And the whole spin-off idea is unproven. The new clone will be neither Nxt not Bitcoin. Merchants who accept Bitcoin won't automatically accept the clone. There probably will be more than one clone, diluting attention. The idea that the clone will instantly have the same market capitalisation as Bitcoin is false. Network effects will encourage people to stick with Bitcoin and/or Nxt, because they will follow the market cap. The reasons that cause alt-coins to struggle, even when they are technically better than Bitcoin, will apply to the new clone.

[Brangdon]

If he wants public review, why doesn't he just post here.

I don't know. Perhaps because this is the Bitcoin forum, not the Nxt forum. The Nxt forum is public: https://nxtforum.org/general-discussion/some-thoughts-on-arguments-of-pow-guys/.

[Eadeqa]

What is interesting to me is that in the (IMO very unlikely) event that Nxt has technical promise, then as soon as the code is open-source it will be possible to create Nxt-clone using the spin-off mechanism and immediately bootstrap the clone with a more efficient distribution than Nxt-original.  

As I understand it, the Nxt code is modular. The core, including the PoS stuff, will be open-source, but some of the services built on top will not be. The Nxt devs believe a lot of their value is in the services - things like the Asset Exchange. So the clone won't include all of Nxt.

Asset Exchange is in the core and is open source.

Third party services (like muiltisig gateway for othjer cryptos)  may or maynot.

[ThePurplePlanet]

What is interesting to me is that in the (IMO very unlikely) event that Nxt has technical promise, then as soon as the code is open-source it will be possible to create Nxt-clone using the spin-off mechanism and immediately bootstrap the clone with a more efficient distribution than Nxt-original.  

As I understand it, the Nxt code is modular. The core, including the PoS stuff, will be open-source, but some of the services built on top will not be. The Nxt devs believe a lot of their value is in the services - things like the Asset Exchange. So the clone won't include all of Nxt.

Asset Exchange is in the core and is open source.

Third party services (like muiltisig gateway for othjer cryptos)  may or maynot.

Why NXT guys are so against open culture? If someone copies it new ideas might emerge.. I dont see the reason to be secretive at all... but it is their choice..

[ChuckOne]

Transparant forging is really impressive, never seen something like that in cryptocurrencies. 

I can relive your emotion.

[ChuckOne]

Not necessarily. The problem in Bitcoin pools is that they are not limited, and the same problem exists with pooled forging.

With DPoS, there is a limit to how much votes each can collect, and any delegate can not dominate; at least openly.

With TF, the amount of consensus power is also limited.

[achimsmile]

Why NXT guys are so against open culture? If someone copies it new ideas might emerge.. I dont see the reason to be secretive at all... but it is their choice..

I can't follow you. Last time I checked there already existed a bunch of Nxt clones because it is open source.

We can't control if third parties are open source or not.

[ChuckOne]

When the attack chain is longer the attacker broadcasts it at which point the "attack chain" becomes the main chain and the "honest" chain just becomes an orphaned minority fork.

The better chain needs to almost mirror the honest one in terms of certain properties.

That is because of the limits in the re-targeting algorithm and because one will not be able to borrow transactions from on branch to another. Especially the latter will make the new chain almost always "unpopular" to adapt. The former needs computational effort.

[SomethingElse]

If DaT ever endorses a POS, I will take my bitcoin go all in with what I feel like I can afford to lose!  He clearly knows what he is talking about and admits what he knows and doesn't know.  I would love to have him really grind out the NXT code and know for sure just what is and isn't possible. 

[jonald_fyookball]

If DaT ever endorses a POS, I will take my bitcoin go all in with what I feel like I can afford to lose!  He clearly knows what he is talking about and admits what he knows and doesn't know.  I would love to have him really grind out the NXT code and know for sure just what is and isn't possible.  

I agree DeathandTaxes is an expert.
No question.

However, I think it would be foolish to dump all
your bitcoins in favor of an altcoin, and I'll
give you 5 reasons why I think so:

1.  You must be careful not to misconstrue
something he (or any expert) says to be an overt "endorsement".

He might say something is good, an idea is good,
or even a coin is good.  Heck, he might even launch
his own coin, but that doesn't mean he's
going to sell all his Bitcoins.  Why would you?

2.  A new idea from an alt may later have problems and I
would bet on 5 years and thousands of people vetting
Bitcoin over what one expert says in a short timeframe.

3. Just because a coin is technically sound doesn't
automatically mean it will be adopted by merchants.
That takes a very long time, and meanwhile other clones
may leapfrog the new coin.

4. DeathandTaxes seems to like the "bootstrap an alt
with a Bitcoin based distribution" idea, meaning that
any new coin that comes out that has promise, may
be cloned and given freely to people that hold Bitcoins.  

So if you sell your Bitcoins, you would miss out
on that.

5. There is no social proof that people
will accept a PoS coin.  Recently, Gavin Andresen
was asked "can PoS work".  His answer was: "maybe,
but is it fair?"

I recall when I first learned about Bitcoin and
being struck by the fact that the miners actually
had to solve problems to get the coins.  I didn't
even know the phrase "proof of work", but my reaction
was "wow, they have to DO something to earn the coins,
its not just something out of nothing.  This seems real
and legit".
---

Bottom line: Invest in alts, if you desire.  But you
don't have to throw out the baby with the bathwater,
even if an expert says something.

[ChuckOne]

I agree with jonald_fyookball. You can let yourself being influenced by self-proclaimed experts but you SHOULD think it through yourself. Always. This does not only apply for coins but for all decisions made in your life.

[huxdy]

DPOS is good

[cybnate26]

I think the POS/POW implementation of Peercoin has proven itself by now. Attacks are certainly not impossible, but extremely expensive. And even if you succeed, something which hasn't happened yet for more than 18 months, the checkpoint system will take you back to square one. Agree that checkpoint system as currently implemented in Peercoin is not great, but it works for the time being while the network strengthens. It is a bit like the policeman in pursuit after you went to the red light. If you know the policeman is there, you might not pass the red light. Would prefer a more pro-active approach and a more secure network though.

Peercoin is currently working hard to get more nodes out in the wild by providing Raspberry Pi images. The new Peerunity wallet (releasing v0.1 soon) will make minting easier and the wallet more user friendly. And there are active discussions on peercointalk.org about increasing the reward for minters, rewards by block and to improve the security with e.g. cold-locked minting. Once implemented this will increase the participation of the coin holders and with that increasing the security of the network. Peershares is also likely to increase the use of Peercoin which would eventually turn into increased security.

The NXT network is way younger but has some promises. The way their forging works is interesting, but I'm personally struggle with the lack of transparency they display at times. Their wallet is finally at a level that someone used to cryptos can manage. The number of mandatory protocol updates is way to high for the average person to keep up with though. This needs to change before wider adoption can begin.

On the sales/marketing argument, NXT has an active development community but is not great on sales, Bitshares also struggles and Peercoin has also its challenges (will have a new video soon  ). All are riding mainly on the back of the Bitcoin train if it comes to attracting new users and marketing to Joe Average. NXT has a bit of a challenge here as they are quiet different and they will need to work harder.

As said earlier in this thread the challenge is in the use of coins by merchants and the general public. NXT has a challenge as it has a different protocol and Bitcoin application can't be ported easily. Peercoin is likely to implement a couple of updates which makes it easier to port Bitcoin applications especially those directly reading the blockchain (getrawtransaction etc.). Haven't looked at Bitshares recently in this context, but thet are certainly looking at a different market.

Not sure what the answer is on the OP's original question, but I agree with other posters in this thread, the coin with the best marketing, usability and adoption will eventually win assuming that the protocol is sound and secure.

_{Disclaimer: I'm invested for 85% in Peercoin, 10% in NXT and 5% in a bucket of other coins.}

[hamiltino]

answer: none

if a certain mining script was any better then the other due to efficiency, then giv it enough time and greedy miners will pile on so many rigs to get the biggest slice of the reward pie. and others will do the same to compete until its no longer efficient.

no matter what th 'puzzle' is to get a reward, people will buy as much equipment as they can to compete. so changing bitcoin with an aim of efficiency is only going to last a few weeks before the competition meets or exceeds the old mining protocols.

so the big picture is that it wont change a thing

you are so biased.

POW problems that are undeniable:
-Costs way more in electricity
-Reliance on Asic/hardware manufacturers
-susceptible to 51% hash power attack
-Waste of space and resources
-Centralized mining pools
-Hardware scams everywhere
List can go on.

[hamiltino]

None as they don't resolve the "nothing at stake" problem.  It may be possible that some future PoS resolves this.  Yes NXT claims to resolve it via secret magical code in TF but until open source and peer reviewed it is just a claim. 

That argument is null and void:

[SomethingElse]

I think the POS/POW implementation of Peercoin has proven itself by now. Attacks are certainly not impossible, but extremely expensive. And even if you succeed, something which hasn't happened yet for more than 18 months, the checkpoint system will take you back to square one. Agree that checkpoint system as currently implemented in Peercoin is not great, but it works for the time being while the network strengthens. It is a bit like the policeman in pursuit after you went to the red light. If you know the policeman is there, you might not pass the red light. Would prefer a more pro-active approach and a more secure network though.

Peercoin is currently working hard to get more nodes out in the wild by providing Raspberry Pi images. The new Peerunity wallet (releasing v0.1 soon) will make minting easier and the wallet more user friendly. And there are active discussions on peercointalk.org about increasing the reward for minters, rewards by block and to improve the security with e.g. cold-locked minting. Once implemented this will increase the participation of the coin holders and with that increasing the security of the network. Peershares is also likely to increase the use of Peercoin which would eventually turn into increased security.

The NXT network is way younger but has some promises. The way their forging works is interesting, but I'm personally struggle with the lack of transparency they display at times. Their wallet is finally at a level that someone used to cryptos can manage. The number of mandatory protocol updates is way to high for the average person to keep up with though. This needs to change before wider adoption can begin.

On the sales/marketing argument, NXT has an active development community but is not great on sales, Bitshares also struggles and Peercoin has also its challenges (will have a new video soon  ). All are riding mainly on the back of the Bitcoin train if it comes to attracting new users and marketing to Joe Average. NXT has a bit of a challenge here as they are quiet different and they will need to work harder.

As said earlier in this thread the challenge is in the use of coins by merchants and the general public. NXT has a challenge as it has a different protocol and Bitcoin application can't be ported easily. Peercoin is likely to implement a couple of updates which makes it easier to port Bitcoin applications especially those directly reading the blockchain (getrawtransaction etc.). Haven't looked at Bitshares recently in this context, but thet are certainly looking at a different market.

Not sure what the answer is on the OP's original question, but I agree with other posters in this thread, the coin with the best marketing, usability and adoption will eventually win assuming that the protocol is sound and secure.

_{Disclaimer: I'm invested for 85% in Peercoin, 10% in NXT and 5% in a bucket of other coins.}

I think these are all valid points and is a good post.  I always like it when I see a person that puts their disclaimer on their post too.  The one part I would emphasis even more too is that almost all the POS coins are doing an absolutely terrible job at marketing.  They will need to not only be good, but find a way to even out market bitcoin if they want to be successful.  Right now that not only isn't happening, but is isn't even close to happening.  Bitcoin has a huge lead in this area.  And to this extent, I think that any other POW coin is sadly mismatched, even litecoin.  Bitcoin verses Litecoin reminds me in some ways of David verses Goliath and Bitcoin verses any other POW alt reminds me of Godzilla verses Bambi.  Those alts just aren't going to make it.  The distance they have to cover while growing at the same time is ridiculous.  They are meant to be born, pumped, and die.  And maybe just maybe one comes up with a feature that bitcoin will then just incorporate. 

I think the only real challenge to bitcoin will come from the different code/different algo/different everything camp.  And even then, I am not sure there will be a real challenge to bitcoin in the near future. 

In the far future, it is 100% that bitcoin will fall to another tech.  All first generation tech gives way to a second generation.  It is basically a law.  A person can not mention one technology that this has not happened to.

[Hyena]

I despise nextcoin because they say "this cannot be done". People who say things such as something cannot be done are moron idiots and proven to be wrong in the future all the times. what a pathetic excuse to for the creation of a scamcoin.

Peercoin is the only PoS coin that deserves attention and respect. Others are just shady clones. You could as well as make a similar topic and allow voting between BitCoin and DogeCoin, asking which one is better by their PoW algorithm

[ChuckOne]

I despise nextcoin because they say "this cannot be done". People who say things such as something cannot be done are moron idiots and proven to be wrong in the future all the times. what a pathetic excuse to for the creation of a scamcoin.

What is this?