rich1.0npub1xqcwcttsyk0a64d63crrwsxp88pa42np37rw87hrfn4uku78g2aqltcnnshttps://nostr.ae/npub1xqcwcttsyk0a64d63crrwsxp88pa42np37rw87hrfn4uku78g2aqltcnnsnjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2021-06-07 📝 Original message:@SatoshiSingh PoLW sounds like a hybrid of PoW and proof of burn. I agree with befreeandopen that proof of burn is basically a form of proof of stake. My conclusion from this exploration <https://github.com/fresheneesz/proofOfTimeOwnership> is that hybrid protocols are a dead end because hybrid protocols have one weaker link that's easier to attack. In this case, miners are burning coinbase rewards. The proof of stake is the burn itself. However, a miner would only burn coins if doing so lead to greater rewards in the future. So the burned coins are in fact actually earned, and still have value. Therefore I would think that miners would still do an amount of work totaling up to the full value of the block reward, regardless of whether they burn it, because any burnt coins should be expected to lead to more coins in the future than were burned. What am I missing? On Wed, Jun 2, 2021 at 10:30 PM SatoshiSingh <SatoshiSingh at protonmail.com> wrote: > Great conversation everyone. I'm happy we're still engaged with this > discussion. To add food for thought I'm bringing back something that was > introduced in this mailing list sometime ago, which is Proof of Less Work. > > PoLW may or may not be it but we can certainly get more ideas from it to > keep the discussion going. > > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/alephium/research/master/polw.pdf > > > Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20210606/1ff6314d/attachment-0001.html>