I just watched V for Vendetta. We are all Satoshi.

Nah, you just need to be delusional about the intelligence of developers

Crypto mining could potentially serve as the motivator that paves the way in the fields of battery storage, electricity efficiency, alternative power solutions etc.. etc.. etc...

lol

lol

lol

The fact that mining operations are moving to places with surplus power generation in order to gain an edge already demonstrates my point.

no

Hmmm, we could entertain the possibility it's not me who's being delusional.

Any thoughts on Tezos delegated proof of stake.....why not just get rid of miners altogether?

The information asymmetry here is very significant

Proof of stake doesn't work unless it's built on top of a proof of work layer. It creates more problems than it solves.

Is it not working as we speak?

Who is mining tezos?

It "works" with trust and no malicious actors. But proof of stake is fundamentally insecure in a number of intractable ways. While it's tiny and you can't short it there is no point for anyone to attack it, however.

Please elaborate...…

I am no expert, or even a novice really....

you claimed it didn't work, then asserted that it does with trust....


please explain the strategy for attacking it , I might need to rethink my positions.


thx in advance

None of these coins are secure. Look at the mountain of alts, you can 51% attack them for tiny amounts. This is because the 'mcap' is meaningless on them. Dentacoin has a 100 million market cap and a total bid of 100k, no one is interested.

The more the coins promise to do (all new altcoins) the more attack surfaces they open up. Pegs, contracts, platforms, scalability, etc all introduce huge new issues when basic issues are still far from solved.

Even solid coins like Monero needed centralized leadership to come up with a POW change, and this was vs a player who wasn't even trying to destroy it. BTC is the strongest, yet could still be effectively shut down in a few hours anytime the Chinese government wants.


Holding any of these long term is an absurdly terrible 'investment' idea. If you want to get rich, find the new coins that will either address these issues, or attract the same crowd of idiots who believed in '17. Then buy them in 2-3 years when crypto is dead, a recession has started, etc and the potential return is back to be huge.

It's a highly complex technical argument. Suffice to say, lots of totally flawed things can work just fine at small scale and with no one attacking them. Take a website as an example. Highly inefficient code + numerous security flaws works just great as long as no one is interested in attacking you and you don't have too many users.

When I say "it doesn't work" it means it doesn't solve the problems that a crypto needs to to be viable and grow. Proof of work has major flaws but it does solve problems - except for scaling problems, due to the amount of memory and bandwidth needed being far larger than current technology.

This is a decent layman's introduction.

https://medium.com/@abhisharm/unders...1-6728020994a1

Something else to think about - if you don't understand any of this, why do you have an edge over the people that do who are more heavily capitalized than you? You don't make money unless you have an edge. Your only edge can be against late buyers in a ponzi scheme.

Here are some criticisms of proof of stake by Paul Sztorc, but there are many others out there if you look around.

Long Live Proof-of-Work, Long Live Mining
Nothing is Cheaper than Proof of Work
Proof of Stake is Still Pointless

If it only works with trust, then it doesn't work at all. Every existing system is based on trust, but the trusted parties are much better regulated by law, and the systems are much more scalable and easily adaptable to changes in requirements. The only aspect of Bitcoin that is different than legacy systems, and which gives it better utility in certain use cases, is that it is trustless.

There are ways to work around the proof of stake trust problem that aren't that different(but definitely worse) to the trust problems that bitcoin has. The real problem is reliably agreeing on a chain now and far in the future.

But yeah, the whole thing is a stack of cards. I don't think there's a viable alternative to proof of work for now*. Well apart from the existing banking/credit card system which kicks it to the curb unless you want to do something illegal/shady.


*nor would you expect there to be looking at it from first principles (effort MUST be required for reward in order to reliably punish cheaters).

Wow, I actually agree with some of Toothsayer's words.

I m curious if cardano will manage a working PoS