Do you think Bitcoin should modify to POW + POS ? █████ Poll █████

[QuestionAuthority]

This thread is funny to watch. You're all talking about the issue as if you have the ability to change Bitcoin. Those people exist on GitHub and the TBF forum. They communicate about the issues over there. Those people have stated, in no uncertain terms, that Bitcoin will not move away from the current PoW system. Unless you're all talking about a new coin that you're going to call Bitcoin then I'm confused about what's happening here.

Yes of course, we are all armchair pundits here but trying to make points why (or why not)
changing the protocol would be a good idea.

I know. I'm in that crowd.

[1714953053]

1714953053

[1714953053]

1714953053

[1714953053]

1714953053

[ab8989]

The technical and security issues are just one of many issues.

Another completely different issue is that does PoS coin have market pull?
Does the PoS message resonate with people at large?

As I understand it the current value of bitcoin comes in quite a big part from hope that bitcoin is going to the moon and even in extreme cases perhaps even some countries adopt bitcoin as their official currency.

The message of PoS has not been tested how much pull there is and I firmly believe that the market pull for PoS coin is much less than PoW coin.

The PoS message sounds way too much like telling people they should buy into a coin that is secured by Rockefellers and Rotschilds.
Some people that were in on it early on and now they are just sitting on their pile of millions doing nothing. Guess what. People do not like Rockefellers or Rothschilds. Sure if you hope you are going to become the Rockefeller or Rotcshild of the new economy you love the idea but nobody else does.

If we then think of some country they see it the other way around. A country thinks some 20 year old George or Mary in their basement are not convincing enough to be the basis to put the security of the whole economy of the country on.

The anonymity of the whoever secures the PoS coin works both ways and neither is good. The anonymity allows people to think simultaniously that the whole security is based on some bunch of 20 year guys in their basement and also at the same time that they are Rockefellers. That just is not going to be a succesful message to sell  and without a resonating message the coin is going nowhere fast.

In PoW this is not such a problem because in PoW marketing message these issues are not in front and center as they are in PoS case.

I believe PoS people understand this problem and therefore PoS people are not really convinced their own superior PoS coin is going to go places on its own. Therefore instead of selling their own coin they are in bitcointalk to convince bitcoin to surrender and die to make way for PoS. That is only way PoS can get places. But I believe that is going to be the high point of PoS if that happens and it is downhill from there.

Not everything technically superior is going to sell well.
There are lots of things that are technically brilliant but market still does not care about them.

[achimsmile]

The PoS message sounds way too much like telling people they should buy into a coin that is secured by Rockefellers and Rotschilds.

in PoW = The Bitmains and spondoolies
edit: I meant the Ghash.ios and Disqus Fishes

What's the difference?
Ah yes, largest mining pools control even a bigger share than largest stakeholders.

[oyasumi]

POW is a breakthrough,but not a good idea.
POW need hash computing,
and,
many computer work,but just one computer's working is effective at one time.
compare to bank,the cost of POW is much more higher.

POS is better,but not enough.
POS do not need hash race,but also one computer's working is effective at one time.
and,
it is not fair to miner,
the output does not connect to hardware input.
only miner who has many coins is going to mine,
it will lead to concentrate.

[oyasumi]

one block gives miner 25 new coins now,
so the system's cost is undertake by people who buy bitcoins,not people who use bitcoins.
but new coin's production rate is reducing,
more and more people will find the cost of bitcoin is too higher.

[Fernandez]

I don't see how a hybrid system makes much of a difference. In future if the Bitcoin holders decide they don't want to be controlled by the cartel, it can move to a pure PoS.

[achimsmile]

POW is a breakthrough,but not a good idea.
POW need hash computing,
and,
many computer work,but just one computer's working is effective at one time.
compare to bank,the cost of POW is much more higher.

POS is better,but not enough.
POS do not need hash race,but also one computer's working is effective at one time.
and,
it is not fair to miner,
the output does not connect to hardware input.
only miner who has many coins is going to mine,
it will lead to concentrate.

Why?

PoW: Miner with most money invested in mining gear gets most coins = rich get richer
PoS: Stakeholder with most money invested in stake gets most coins = rich get richer ( not so much, only 0.5% per year in Nxt)

[oyasumi]

POW is a breakthrough,but not a good idea.
POW need hash computing,
and,
many computer work,but just one computer's working is effective at one time.
compare to bank,the cost of POW is much more higher.

POS is better,but not enough.
POS do not need hash race,but also one computer's working is effective at one time.
and,
it is not fair to miner,
the output does not connect to hardware input.
only miner who has many coins is going to mine,
it will lead to concentrate.

Why?

PoW: Miner with most money invested in mining gear gets most coins = rich get richer
PoS: Stakeholder with most money invested in stake gets most coins = rich get richer ( not so much, only 0.5% per year in Nxt)

The point is the cost of hardware.

If people use  virtual currency million times per second,the money spend on computing device、I/O device、electricity bills must not be ignored.

Hardware cost/total cost higher,profit rate lower.the money spend on hardware is same,so rich investors will get higher profit rate(PoS only).

[achimsmile]

POW is a breakthrough,but not a good idea.
POW need hash computing,
and,
many computer work,but just one computer's working is effective at one time.
compare to bank,the cost of POW is much more higher.

POS is better,but not enough.
POS do not need hash race,but also one computer's working is effective at one time.
and,
it is not fair to miner,
the output does not connect to hardware input.
only miner who has many coins is going to mine,
it will lead to concentrate.

Why?

PoW: Miner with most money invested in mining gear gets most coins = rich get richer
PoS: Stakeholder with most money invested in stake gets most coins = rich get richer ( not so much, only 0.5% per year in Nxt)

The point is the cost of hardware.

If people use  virtual currency million times per second,the money spend on computing device、I/O device、electricity bills must not be ignored.

Hardware cost/total cost higher,profit rate lower.the money spend on hardware is same,so rich investors will get higher profit rate(PoS only).

Exactly! mining is costly. large mining firms have cheaper rates per miner or kwh compared to most private persons. they are the only ones that get rich. Or have you ROIed on recently purchased hardware?

Why throw money out of the window for miners if you can just stake. Same chances for everyone per bought coin.

The process just looks more efficient to me.

[pawel7777]

The PoS message sounds way too much like telling people they should buy into a coin that is secured by Rockefellers and Rotschilds.

in PoW = The Bitmains and spondoolies
edit: I meant the Ghash.ios and Disqus Fishes

What's the difference?
Ah yes, largest mining pools control even a bigger share than largest stakeholders.

The difference is that dominating pools/miners change all the time. Right now it's Discuss Fish, not too long ago it was GHash, before that BTC Guid, Eligius, Slush etc.

They had significant % share in hashrate but lost it to others.

If you have PoS holder controlling significant % of all coins - there's nothing you or anyone can do about it. Unless he willingly give up some of his stake, he will remain with his % and will be slowly increasing his market share.

[Flashman]

Exactly! mining is costly. large mining firms have cheaper rates per miner or kwh compared to most private persons. they are the only ones that get rich. Or have you ROIed on recently purchased hardware?

Well, given "reasonable" electricity rates, 10c a kilowatt or better, hobby scale miners do have the advantage that a couple of kilowatts of heat is fairly easy to disperse, and may actually be useful during the cold months. Whereas industrial scale miners need to pay to get rid of the heat, effectively doubling what they pay overall in electricity.

However there is also the problem of which manufacturer is delivering reliably at this point in time.

[achimsmile]

The PoS message sounds way too much like telling people they should buy into a coin that is secured by Rockefellers and Rotschilds.

in PoW = The Bitmains and spondoolies
edit: I meant the Ghash.ios and Disqus Fishes

What's the difference?
Ah yes, largest mining pools control even a bigger share than largest stakeholders.

The difference is that dominating pools/miners change all the time. Right now it's Discuss Fish, not too long ago it was GHash, before that BTC Guid, Eligius, Slush etc.

They had significant % share in hashrate but lost it to others.

If you have PoS holder controlling significant % of all coins - there's nothing you or anyone can do about it. Unless he willingly give up some of his stake, he will remain with his % and will be slowly increasing his market share.

It does not matter if Disqus Fish or Ghash.io has >20% of the hashpower.

And almost all stakeholders changed (at least the coins are now in different addresses) in my PoS coin.

The hardest fact for me is just:

https://blockchain.info/pools

vs.

https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_charts (click on "blocks")

Despite all "rich getting richer", there are more parties (or accounts) involved in block generating of my PoS coin.

[achimsmile]

Well, given "reasonable" electricity rates, 10c a kilowatt or better, hobby scale miners do have the advantage that a couple of kilowatts of heat is fairly easy to disperse, and may actually be useful during the cold months. Whereas industrial scale miners need to pay to get rid of the heat, effectively doubling what they pay overall in electricity.

Good counter example

[johnyj]

Wrong place, this poll should run at POS forum 

[achimsmile]

The PoS message sounds way too much like telling people they should buy into a coin that is secured by Rockefellers and Rotschilds.

in PoW = The Bitmains and spondoolies
edit: I meant the Ghash.ios and Disqus Fishes

What's the difference?
Ah yes, largest mining pools control even a bigger share than largest stakeholders.

The difference is that dominating pools/miners change all the time. Right now it's Discuss Fish, not too long ago it was GHash, before that BTC Guid, Eligius, Slush etc.

They had significant % share in hashrate but lost it to others.

If you have PoS holder controlling significant % of all coins - there's nothing you or anyone can do about it. Unless he willingly give up some of his stake, he will remain with his % and will be slowly increasing his market share.

It does not matter if Disqus Fish or Ghash.io has >20% of the hashpower.

And almost all stakeholders changed (at least the coins are now in different addresses) in my PoS coin.

The hardest fact for me is just:

https://blockchain.info/pools

vs.

https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_charts (click on "blocks")

Despite all "rich getting richer", there are more parties (or accounts) involved in block generating of my PoS coin.

Since we are talking about BTC going PoS,

We have to look at bitcoin richlist to see that the richest address would only produce 1% of all blocks.
Sounds much better than the >20% of Disqus Fish, or not?

[pawel7777]

It does not matter if Disqus Fish or Ghash.io has >20% of the hashpower.
...

Sure. But what does matter is if any of them gains too much power, there are actions you can take to change the current state.

What doesn't matter are the stats you've quoted. They don't show "persons or accounts" they show "accounts" only.

How many people control what stake? You don't know and you'll never know, until the biggest holders reveal themselves and prove their holdings.

Who in the right mind, holding 40%, 50% or 60% of coins, would keep them all in one wallet? Would you?

And that's another problem with PoS.

Also, remember that we're discussing bitcoin as PoS, so comparing to NXT can be pointless (all the NXT coins have already been issued etc). And we need to look also at theoretical long-term threats.

[kokojie]

The technical and security issues are just one of many issues.

Another completely different issue is that does PoS coin have market pull?
Does the PoS message resonate with people at large?

As I understand it the current value of bitcoin comes in quite a big part from hope that bitcoin is going to the moon and even in extreme cases perhaps even some countries adopt bitcoin as their official currency.

The message of PoS has not been tested how much pull there is and I firmly believe that the market pull for PoS coin is much less than PoW coin.

The PoS message sounds way too much like telling people they should buy into a coin that is secured by Rockefellers and Rotschilds.
Some people that were in on it early on and now they are just sitting on their pile of millions doing nothing. Guess what. People do not like Rockefellers or Rothschilds. Sure if you hope you are going to become the Rockefeller or Rotcshild of the new economy you love the idea but nobody else does.

If we then think of some country they see it the other way around. A country thinks some 20 year old George or Mary in their basement are not convincing enough to be the basis to put the security of the whole economy of the country on.

The anonymity of the whoever secures the PoS coin works both ways and neither is good. The anonymity allows people to think simultaniously that the whole security is based on some bunch of 20 year guys in their basement and also at the same time that they are Rockefellers. That just is not going to be a succesful message to sell  and without a resonating message the coin is going nowhere fast.

In PoW this is not such a problem because in PoW marketing message these issues are not in front and center as they are in PoS case.

I believe PoS people understand this problem and therefore PoS people are not really convinced their own superior PoS coin is going to go places on its own. Therefore instead of selling their own coin they are in bitcointalk to convince bitcoin to surrender and die to make way for PoS. That is only way PoS can get places. But I believe that is going to be the high point of PoS if that happens and it is downhill from there.

Not everything technically superior is going to sell well.
There are lots of things that are technically brilliant but market still does not care about them.

WTF are you talking about? PoW and PoS are not crypto currency, they are just ways to process transactions. One way uses electricity+hardware waste as proof, we can call it Proof of Waste (PoW). The other way uses stakeholder's stake as proof, which is Proof of Stake (PoS).

PoW gives control of the network to centralized non-stakeholding profit crazy mining farms, they could potentially easily hold 51%+ hash rate in one organization. This has already happened multiple time in the past, when slush or Ghash.io held 51% hash power.

PoS gives control of the network to 100% of the stakeholders and completely decentralized.

You don't have to have a reward in PoS mining, just like there's negative financial reward for running Bitcoin full nodes, but 7000+ people are running them.

You can just set the PoS reward to barely cover the expense of running a full node, it's not for rich getting richer at all.

[samuel999]

I think it should, just too much scandal surrounding the mining as well as electricity waste.

[achimsmile]

Sure. But what does matter is if any of them gains too much power, there are actions you can take to change the current state.

What doesn't matter are the stats you've quoted. They don't show "persons or accounts" they show "accounts" only.

How many people control what stake? You don't know and you'll never know, until the biggest holders reveal themselves and prove their holdings.

Who in the right mind, holding 40%, 50% or 60% of coins, would keep them all in one wallet? Would you?

And that's another problem with PoS.

Where's the difference between PoS and PoW here? Hashpower controlled by one party split between multiple pools is just as much possible in PoW.

And we need to look also at theoretical long-term threats.

Could you elaborate?

[achimsmile]

You can just set the PoS reward to barely cover the expense of running a full node, it's not for rich getting richer at all.

That's what most people don't realize. PoS reward is just a measure to prevent blockchain spam. Even large stakeholders in non inflationary PoS systems don't make much money from forging.