<unnamed>

Public Key

npub1vnx8mse24j0rgxg8wwgtjhwz0x98m5uftee5jv8z7wkeum2zdetsyw7tdn

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsxfnracv42e835ryrh8y9ethp8nzna6wy4uu6fxr308tv7d4pxu4cpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnwv46qz9rhwden5te0wfjkccte9ejxzmt4wvhxjmcpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqjam200

Publishing to

relay.nostr.net

relay.damus.io

nos.lol

Last Notes

2023-06-07 22:54:15 UTC

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2021-06-17
📝 Original message:Barrier to entry in PoW is matter for hardware and energy is permissionless
and exist all over the universe, permissionless cost which exists for
everyone no matter who because it's unforgeable.
Barrier to entry in PoS is being given permission by the previous owner of
a token for you to have it via transfer or sale, both choices they never
have to make since there are no continuous costs with producing blocks
forcing it. A permission is an infinitely high barrier to entry if the
previous owner, like the premining party, refuses to give up the token they
control.
You're skipping the part where you depend on a permission of a central
party in control of the authority token before you can produce blocks on
your rasberry Pi.
Proof of stake is not in any possible way relevant to permissionless
protocols, and thus not possibly relevant to decentralized protocols where
control must be distributed to independent (i.e. permissionless) parties.
There's nothing of relevance to discuss and this has been figured out long
long ago.
https://github.com/libbitcoin/libbitcoin-system/wiki/Proof-of-Stake-Fallacy
https://medium.com/@factchecker9000/nothing-is-worse-than-proof-of-stake-e70b12b988ca
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 7:13 AM James MacWhyte via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> @Lloyd wrote:
>
> Of course in reality no one wants to keep their coin holding keys online
>> so in Alogorand you can authorize a set of "participation keys"[1] that
>> will be used to create blocks on your coin holding key's behalf.
>> Hopefully you've spotted the problem.
>> You can send your participation keys to any malicious party with a nice
>> website (see random example [2]) offering you a good return.
>> Damn it's still Proof-of-SquareSpace!
>>
>
> I believe we are talking about a comparison to PoW, correct? If you want
> to mine PoW, you need to buy expensive hardware and configure it to work,
> and wait a long time to get any return by solo mining. Or you can join a
> mining pool, which might use your hashing power for nefarious purposes. Or
> you might skip the hardware all together and fall for some "cloud mining"
> scheme with a pretty website and a high rate of advertised return. So as
> you can see, Proof-of-SquareSpace exists in PoW as well!
>
> The PoS equivalent of buying mining hardware is setting up your own
> validator and not outsourcing that to anyone else. So both PoW and PoS have
> the professional/expert way of participating, and the fraud-prone, amateur
> way of participating. The only difference is, with PoS the
> professional/expert way is accessible to anyone with a raspberry Pi and a
> web connection, which is a much lower barrier to entry than PoW.
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20210616/6692b76b/attachment.html>

2023-06-07 22:52:40 UTC

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2021-05-09
📝 Original message:Proof of stake is permissioned by coins, an internal, permissioned, and
already owned resource.
You cannot gain tokens without someone choosing to give up those coins - a
form of permission. Permission can also be thought of as an infinite
barrier to entry.
PoW forces giving up control through both permissionless to enter mining
via EXTERNAL permissionless resources and unforgeable costliness for the
miners.
Without unforgeable costliness there's no reason to ever give up control in
PoS.
In fact, staking quite literally incentivizes keeping control by rewarding
those in control with more coins and control in perpetuity at no cost - the
incentives on PoS are completely backwards from decentralizing control.
Since no mechanism forces control to be permissionlessly distributed to
others, parties in control cannot be considered independent parties nor can
control be considered decentralized.
PoS solves nothing that's relevant to permissionless decentralized networks.
> In the following years we'll be seeing proof of stake being implemented
It has been implemented since 2014 but it doesn't meet criteria for a
permissionless network. There's nothing new about implementing permissioned
networks.
You could try to replace proof of work with proof of bitcoin burn (not well
studied) on blockchains other than Bitcoin, but there's no known
replacement for proof of work for Bitcoin right now.
PoS has been considered and studied since then many times since then and
dismissed repeatedly for irrelevance to decentralized permissionless
technology, examples:
- https://nakamotoinstitute.org/research/on-stake-and-consensus/
-
https://medium.com/@factchecker9000/nothing-is-worse-than-proof-of-stake-e70b12b988ca
- https://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-cheapest/
-
https://hugonguyen.medium.com/work-is-timeless-stake-is-not-554c4450ce18
- https://arxiv.org/abs/1809.06528
On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 10:49 AM Karl via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> What is more important;
>> Bitcoin mining introduces the first free-market demand for the cheapest
>> energy source.
>
>
> This is a really great idea but I think access to technologically advanced
> hardware is a stronger component than energy here.
>
> Making open community chip fabs might change that. Then anybody could get
> on the bandwagon. But right now the hardware barrier keeps the common
> person out.
>
> If you can build a chip fab, you may also be able to build a powerplant.
> Not many others can do that to compete with you. The energy economy still
> has more supply than competition or renewable energy would quickly
> outcompete nonrenewable as the price dropped.
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20210509/b188b6b3/attachment-0001.html>