Bitcoin Forum
April 19, 2018, 10:02:22 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.16.0  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Why is the interest in proof of stake limited?  (Voting closed: March 26, 2012, 04:49:08 AM)
It would require a fork or an altchain. Bitcoin would have been better off starting with proof of stake, now it is too late. - 15 (14.3%)
I don't understand how proof of stake would work? - 15 (14.3%)
I like proof of stake and would prefer a fork, but the fork is useless without majority agreement, and majority is impossible to obtain. - 5 (4.8%)
I own a lot of GPUs, but not much coin. This proposal would fuck me over personally. - 7 (6.7%)
I don't think there is any problem with bitcoin. Thus proof of stake is not necessary. - 34 (32.4%)
I think there is a problem, but I am waiting for a better solution. - 10 (9.5%)
I support proof of stake in an altchain. - 9 (8.6%)
I support proof of stake in a minority fork - 4 (3.8%)
Some other viewpoint explained below. - 6 (5.7%)
Total Voters: 60

Pages: « 1 2 [3]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Why isn't proof of stake more widely supported?  (Read 3784 times)
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1000


Gerald Davis


View Profile
March 19, 2012, 09:06:01 PM
 #41

Wasn't SolidCoin a Proof-of-Stake chain, where a few trusted miners started out with 10,000,000 coins each to make sure the "benevolent stakeholders" were the only ones able to mine/sign transactions?

It was only in the mostt bastard form.

1) There was one stakeholder.
2) He gave himself 12M coins via a premine.

It isn't much of a "stake" if you get it for free.  It isn't much of a decentralized currency if you rig the rules so that you and you only will be the only stakeholder into perpetuity.

Pretending solidcoin is a crypto-currency just devalues the term.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1524175342
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1524175342

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1524175342
Reply with quote  #2

1524175342
Report to moderator
Rassah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1680
Merit: 1001


Academy


View Profile WWW
March 19, 2012, 09:18:33 PM
 #42

Kinda demonstrates the problem with getting PoS started, too, doesn't it?

DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1000


Gerald Davis


View Profile
March 19, 2012, 09:19:18 PM
 #43

Kinda demonstrates the problem with getting PoS started, too, doesn't it?

No. 
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736
Merit: 1000

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
March 20, 2012, 01:36:17 AM
 #44

Wasn't SolidCoin a Proof-of-Stake chain, where a few trusted miners started out with 10,000,000 coins each to make sure the "benevolent stakeholders" were the only ones able to mine/sign transactions?
SolidCoin starts as a monopoly and becomes a cryptocurrency when miners are rewarded with transaction fees based on hashrate.
PoS starts as a cryptocurrency and becomes a monopoly.
The only thing worse would be to code PoS rules into SolidCoin. OTOH, some people might like that.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
Cubanlinx81
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 182
Merit: 11

CryptoRex


View Profile
December 03, 2017, 05:47:47 AM
 #45

I want to ask the same question!! PoS support the core values that Satoshi Nakamura held. Proof of Work allows the same moneyed elite to dominate the system. PoS levels the playing field for the average person. Not to mention the devastating environmental impact from PoW....

Pages: « 1 2 [3]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!