POW

Egge_

For pretty much every coin there is at least one address that hold enough coins to flood the markets and make them dip. A coins value is a snapshot of the current market situation, not hard-value. Another argument against POS would be, that there is no real timeline. POW made a timechain consensus possible and POS can not work without someone coordinating time for all validators. If you are interested in some proper write ups about POS’ flaws, you should read some of Gigi’s articles. Here is one of my favourites: https://dergigi.com/2021/01/14/bitcoin-is-time/

warlikeofthechaos

Also with POS you need to buy a huge amount to lock and starting get rewards. That pump and inflates the prices for current holders In POW the rig that you buy doesn’t influences the price of crypto

cardassie

ETC and RVN as profitable alternatives when ETH 2.0 stops POW. And still buying ETH this dip.

realsqueaky

ERG or Ergo seems to be the underhyped ADA. Comprehensive architecture and has advanced POW. Should receive more attention when ETH has moved to POS, capturing market share of miners.

P3P3X

I got money that says it better…or *POW* right in the kisser 🤜🏻😖

Eislemike

If you really want to be able to convince people of your view you should make steel man arguments instead of strawman arguments. In order to do that you need to know the arguments for PoW being good for the environment. Only then can you write about them and describe how they are incorrect. Read all of Nic Carter’s work. Check out the Seetee shareholder letter, check out the square/ark research paper, Lyn Aldens Mining research. Jeff Booths arguments on inflation and it’s effects on consumption and the environment. And then learn why we can be confident Bitcoin will have a consistent monetary schedule and hard cap, which ties into that argument inextricably. Bitcoin is energy deflationary. It will likely have a net positive effect on the environment and certainly a positive effect on human energy production and therefore progress. It just takes some curiosity to learn enough to understand that. It also would help you to realize why that unforgeable costliness (POW) is necessary. Check out Nick Szabo’s speeches and articles, listen to some Adam Back, Look into the history of money(Rai Stones, glass beads, cloth strips, fiat etc, all lost their moneyness when the cost to produce or reproduce trended to zero.) read Inventing Bitcoin, The Bitcoin Standard, and Debt the First 5000 years. Links: Jeff Booths best stuff is on the What Is Money Podcast probably. https://overcast.fm/+mNduVhGsI (what is money episode 15) But anything new would have him talking about this. He is on multiple podcasts. Nic Carter: https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2021/10/11/bitcoin-mining-is-reshaping-the-energy-sector-and-no-one-is-talking-about-it/ Several more top tier articles by Nic: https://niccarter.info/topics/#energy Ark & Square: https://assets.ctfassets.net/2d5q1td6cyxq/2D2BnksJjavw4a6SUvAPwZ/c42a9e3a520b0cc3b230cda3b43eead5/BCEI_White_Paper_.pdf Seetee: https://www.seetee.io/static/shareholder_letter-6ae7e85717c28831bf1c0eca1d632722.pdf Lyn Alden: https://www.lynalden.com/bitcoin-energy/ I’d agree it’s arguable that Eth doesn’t need pow since it’s not trying to be money. But that’s a different type of argument.

BlubberWall

That’s incorrect, so how POW works is miners all compete to brute force find a hash that starts with a pre-selected starting sequence. So the BTC network would say “this next block should start with 0x2A13…. “ (Or something like that) Miners then compete to find a value that will hash and match that. Higher hashpower simply means you have more processing power to brute force hash. There’s no trust there, a simple laptop technically could find the hash faster than an entire coal powered BTC farm, but it’s super unlikely. When it’s found the miner announces to the network, and all nodes make sure it’s legit before adding it to their chains. There’s no more implicit trust given based on hash rate, they just are more likely to beat others out in finding it.

DadofHome

So if a super power with the money and no worries about losing funds has a better chance to attack POS over POW

002timmy

How to spot a Bitcoin maxi. There are many articles and even proofs that show PoS is as secure as PoW. Yes, 51% attacks are possible, but controlling 51% of all tokens is likely very expensive, and even if you controlled 51% and did some fuckery, you’d ruin the value of your token and then lose more money. The argument that in POW, bad actors are punished, but not in PoS is patently false. Stake slashings, ejections, and other penalties exist. Other validators can also flag the bad transactions. Stop spreading FUD

The-Francois8

Are you conflating electricity usage with CO2 emissions? Or do you think the “burning” of ETH releases CO2? I’ve seen people make both arguments. Obviously PoS uses less electricity than PoW. But if POW uses renewable energy, then there’s no CO2 emission, so settle down.

timeisnotyourfriend

Well by Nokia you mean outdated tech, yes I think that will be the case at some point, because we're moving from POW to POS. Then there will be other Proofs like Proof of History or Proof of something else... Then things may get much easier and faster compared to BTC or ETH. On the other hand BTC = Crypto in normies eyes. So, it might stay more than anticipated as a novelty even if it's not functional anymore.

TwoSoonOrNah

Amish are POW.

FutureBoatinAccident

Bias confirmed With the move away from ETH when it moves to POS, miners will flock to POW coins like ergo

BlubberWall

I simply don’t want to invest in new POW coins since they don’t have the legacy backing of other ones. Good luck to anyone that does though

NextGenAce

Staking seems like It's going to cause a lot of problems. Well it is true that POW is facing lots of opposition, POS will either be insanely successful, or just die. I predict 95% will just die, 5% will actually work.

randysailer

Yeah i agree it will crash hardcore when it moves to POS and its price will fall in line with other POS networks it been POW is whats making it valuable.

bear_in_hawaii

What about taking over the network if they are able to win all the POW rewards, change the code, and steal ALL the bitcoins?

ImTheVictim

lol what? POW is not outdated.

Hawke64

POW is outdated technology. It is a good thing that we are moving away from it.

Khan_Tango

Ergo is also eUTXO and will definitely take over the POW side of the blockchain space once Eth leaves the building.

Esteozeka

Signum / Signa. I'm invested since \~4-5 years. Why? It's the only truly green blockhain and it has a lot to offer. (For example it was the first blockchain that supported smart contracts.) It doesn't use POW or Staking.

CamelSpotting

All of those things have benefits. POW is literally just a controlled waste.

Isulet

DAG- What is it? DAG stands for Directed Acyclic Graph. It is a mathematical and computational structure which offers similar functions as Blockchain technology. It is "Directed" in the sense that a transaction or data transmission going through the system has a defined direction and "Acyclic" in the sense that after traveling through the entirety of the structure these transactions or transmissions can not return to where they began. This can be envisioned as a "Graph", with the points on the graph being the nodes through which information is sent. These nodes act as issuer and validator of a transaction. Let's look at some of the Pros of DAG as compared to its competitor, the Blockchain. Pro 1- No miners With the blockchain, especially within POW consensus, miners are racing to solve a complex mathematical problem in order to secure the network. With DAG, the nodes can issue and validate the transactions themselves. This ability does away with the need for miners and the fees/incentives needed to get and keep miners in the system. Some cryptocurrencies like Nano and IOTA operate under DAG and to use the crypto users pay a microtransaction or none at all. This is a huge difference compared to the high fees needed to secure a network like Ethereum. Pro 2- Environmental Impact This pro goes hand in hand with the absence of miners. One of the biggest sticking points against POW and Blockchain is energy consumption due to miners. With DAG, there is no need for miners, and thus no need for the huge amounts of energy consumption that come with miners. Pro 3- Fast Due to the ability of the nodes to issue and validate, the speed and scalability of cryptos on DAG is increased. This is also combined with the parallellism of the system. This is important because this is part of the Trilemma problem with Blockchain (The idea that a decentralized network can only provide 2 out of 3 of certain benefits at any given time, with those benefits being decentralization, security, and scalability). The other two parts of the Trilemma will be addressed in other Pros 4 and 5. Pro 4- Decentralization DAG promotes decentralization because the transactions are independent and build on top of each other. Previous transactions can be traced back through the nodes on the graph. Changing one node means changing all of them. Through this design it is decentralized and can't be controlled by a central entity. Pro 5- Security This is where it can get a little hazy. In order to achieve security with DAG, there needs to be a high level of transactions going through the system. If that high volume exists, then it secures the network. Without the high level of transactions the system is vulnerable to attacks. This can be seen with the hacking attack on IOTA. Conclusion DAG is a great alternative to the blockchain that hasn't fully been worked out. The complexity involved with DAG and low transaction volume leave the system vulnerable. But if it were to be implemented successfully then it could be a major competitor with the blockchain. It presents a solution for the blockchain trilemma, doesn't need miners, and has low fees. It is a great system for the cryptoverse.

crimeo

> Cause they will know it now can be rigged. And? > They don't have to do anything notorious with it. Uh I mean 51% of ASICs doesn't HAVE to do anything notorious either yo. > The preparation of a 51% attack on POS and on POW is radically different. Not in any important ways, the actual person with power is writing a similarly sized check in both cases, with similar opportunities for sneakiness or not. > So on POS nobody can prepare for it, cause nobody knows it's coming. "Prepare" how? The only thing you've mentioned is a dumb plan about "getting out your old mining machines" which accomplishes nothing except making yourself lose money for no reason. > They will sound the alarm. Oh no! Not the alarm! My only weakness! Wait neverming, I don't give a shit, because "the alarm" does nothing to stop the attack for either type of coin. > On POW you perpetually need above 51% so be able to fuck with the network. On proof of stake once you get to 51% of stake and never sell you win and that's that. Okay so? Any coin with a 51% attack is never going to be trusted as a dominant financial instrument in the world ever again, who cares? Also any PoW coin that has had a 51% attack is going to imminently have another 51% attack a few weeks later, because the same guys still have all those ASICs. Maybe you temporarily claw your way back to 49% for them, but those guys only have to buy another 1% to attack again. Come on, man. Let's be real. It's fucking over for either coin in an attack. They're done. > Most proof of stake networks are most likely already controlled by a single entity. Literally just making up fantasies now, that's pretty desperate. Several PoS coins are actually currently more diversely distributed actually than bitcoin is, as measured by "number of distinct entities that would have to be added together at the moment to reach 51%"

mindflayers9000

No, no, it is actually bad for the environment. This post is gaslighting. Not saying that you shouldn't mine or that we shouldn't use POW coins but trying to state the increase use of electricity required to run PoW isn't bad for the environment is asinine. Comparing crypto with fiat is also a form of whataboutism.

i_have_chosen_a_name

Of course getting 51% is easier if all you have to do is buy virtual stuff with other virtual stuff. To get 51% hashrate you need to build asics, have powerplugs, etc etc. The first you can do covert, the second you can not. You have no idea if somebody does not already has 51% of the ETH in their hands. On POW it's a little easier to find this out. Just look at where the power draw is and who is drawing it.

leastOfKings

Vertcoin is a pretty solid project with a lot of loyal supporters. Myself included. It’s still around and being developed actively mirroring Bitcoin development. I’ve believe in Bitcoin since I learned about it in 2013 and started mining it then. I’m big on POW coins and believe Vertcoin will have its place in this cryptoverse. Vert will have its day.

TriggerWarning595

Pretty good counter example? In the same video talking about environmental damage is also suggesting using a POW token with much, much more energy use.

Nostalg33k

While I don't believe this to be a serious threat, I wish POW computation power would go towards scientific research instead of complexity for the sake of it.

Podcastsandpot

SOrry, but POW mining uses tons of energy, and that is not positive for the enrionment. Using less energy is better for the environment. COins like nano and algorand that bring us all the benefits of bitcoin and ethereum, without all the insanely high energy requirements, will be the top ranking coins in the near future. Big institutions that invest based on ESG are never going to put significant money into any blockchain that uses as much energy as a entire nation every day. Waste of energy for no reason.

rach2bach

Ok, I need to fucking rant, because I'm fucking seething with anger over how many people are circle jerking it over in the Sweden banning bitcoin threads here on reddit. So many fucking morons are saying that BITCOIN is the reason that COUNTRIES AND PRIVATE ENTERPRISE use FOSSIL FUELS. Holy fuck, like I don't even know where to begin to call out the stupidity, so I'll try my best and keep it simple for the fucking idiots that might read this to continue the circle jerking: 1. Bitcoin has literally nothing to do with the sourcing of energy. If a coal plant uses an excess amount of electricity/load, and miners take advantage of that with lower costs, they in turn increase their profit margin with a lower kw/h cost. Though this seems like it's great for bitcoin mining operations, and bad for the environment, it would be disingenuous to state that bitcoin is the reason fossil fuels are being used. 2. Bitcoin miners will seek out lower costs. Right now, kw/h is moving towards solar/battery combinations being the cheapest source of energy, and you know what most mining operations are doing? Moving to renewables, and largely solar as a result of this. Now many of the dumbfucks will counter and say: "Yes, but it still costs fossil fuels to produce said systems, and that cost is a legacy cost since the mining operations will always demand energy at peak load." 3. How does one counter such idiocy other than saying that Bitcoin mining operations are moving towards energy production at the same time they are choosing to mine, so that they can create an excess in energy instead of only increasing consumption. Basically: why not get paid for both? 4. Holy fucking fuckity fuck fuck fuck, maybe put the fucking blame on the last 2 centuries of fossil fuel consumption for a 1.5 degree centrigade delta in the next 30 years instead of a network that consumes less energy than Venezuela. Holy fuck the stupidity is beyond me, and I'm sick and tired of people who think they know anything about it. 5. Industrial engineers that understand POW, load efficiency, and Bitcoin in general are crying right now. Look Steven and Karen, you made Bob and Julie cry because of your stupidity. Holy fuck, stfu about bitcoin being the main cause of climate change because you're salty you missed out on financial gains. You're being a disingenuous prick, and really need to realize that most of the people on the internet are likely astro-turfing this kind of info from fossil fuel industries to screw with people's perceptions of central banking, fractionalized reserve banking, the petro-dollar, and how they all work with Bitcoin in the background trying to stop credit bubbles and actual accounting and to bring in an age of 3rd party verification instead of just trusting what are more or less criminal magicians at some fucking fucked up central bank with blood on their hands.

Latter_Box9967

Going in circles mate. You can’t buy a 51% attack on POW like you can on POS. (If I remember correctly the Byzantine fault on POS is actually 33%) You need to either convince enough miners to undermine themselves, or, buy enough equipment to have 51% of the hashrate. As mentioned above the attacking miners would get soon cutoff by the nodes. That equipment must include the power to run them. You couldn’t just plug them into any existing power grid. You’d have to make your own, including power station/s. They just consume too much electricity.

I_CATastrophic

This is Solanas biggest threat. An infinitely scalable layer 1 POW named [Kadena](http://Kadena - Just an ETH Killer: https://youtu.be/G_XZv_TN7V8). It has a current throughput of 480,000 transactions per second, and contains a strong team with an insane amount of futureproofing. It is stated that "Today, we can settle the entire US stock market without breaking a sweat on 20 chains." What are some of my favorite attributes of Kadena? • Under a penny transfer fees, and even get cheaper when scaled. • Smart programing language 'Pact' that is "1000x faster to code on than Solidity". By using an automated error checker, and human readable code developers will be able to out develop any other developers on other languages. This will be huge with adoption, and also allows lawyers/bankers can read what is within a smart contract making everything more secure. • By the use of Proof of Work, KDA is even more secure than its POS counterparts. Similarly to bitcoin it is able to stay fully decentralized(while being electrically efficient, while scaling) with the power of ASIC's and would need "More than all of Switzerlands computing power to 51% attack Kadena", compared to POS projects that run into the risk of becoming centralized overtime due to whales. Prodominantly, whales that get in early, and are able to overtime accumulate more and more of the liquidity. Which can evidently pose a threat to Decentralization. • Co-founders Will Martino and Stuart Popejoy, prior to building Kadena in 2017, they built and lead JP Morgan's first blockchain and found the limitations, which lead them to leave JPM. As for Will, before JPM he worked at the SEC and I'm sure they are prepared and ready for the Regulation Rugpull that is going to flip crypto and POS projects upside down. • The team is also advised by [Stuart Haber](https://youtu.be/ELjp1gclsTU), the father of the blockchain, and also the most cited person in Bitcoins whitepaper. TLDR: Say goodbye to the blockchain trilemma, and hello to full wallets. KDA will be top 5 guaranteed.

wowwee99

And this is why we need POW

Secret-Service_Agent

Not to mention POW is superior to POS imo

JumboHotdogz

Not sure if related but what if a quantum computer is used as a miner in a POW system?

OkSignature8169

POW: you're a meme coin investor

lovenilo

I read the original article and the following debate. The core argument is that POW cryptos' societal benefits are not in par with the energy consumption. When faced with follow up questions the authors are very vague in what is enough societal benefit and what other energy intensive sectors brings to the table in the matter, for example holiday lighting around Christmas. And for the financial part it's about protecting fiat by hiding behind environmental arguments and claiming criminal elements using cryptos.

fingerfunk99

Yeah that user just confused you. Let me clarify. All coins are 'located' in wallets on their respective blockchain that is constantly being calculated and confirmed by miners (POW) or VALIDATORS (POS). Think of wallets like a transparent dropbox. Anyone can put coins in. Only the person with a key can take coins out. The key is an encrypted file that can be viewed as a string of characters. This string can be printed out as a qr code for paper 'wallets'. For hardware 'wallets', the file is located in a chip on the device. Like in real life, keys can be broken, lost, stolen, and DUPLICATED. But in crypto, keys are duplicated by using the seed phrase. This is why the seed phrase should be the most protected thing. You'll read about people that engrave it into fireproof metal and sore it in a safe. NEVER type these words into a computer or take a picture of them. TLDR; Seed -> Key -> Wallet -> Blockchain

vasilenko93

Isn’t POW more centralized as you have a higher barrier to entry, while for POS it’s anyone with the coin? You can join staking pools and u like mining pools, you don’t need reliable electricity with reliable internet and expensive hardware.

cryptoham135

I’m not comparing POS to lightning, i’m saying for bitcoin to be useable it needs lightning because other than a SOV it lends itself to centralised control because sadly everyone can’t transact with it. I also understand lightning network, i could have gotten a very similar breakdown from google. you clearly don’t understand what i’m saying, the security you speak of with regards to bitcoin is the enormous amount of work done securing the network to which bitcoiners will say is vital. What i’m saying is your opening channels with a valid transaction and only closing them on the secure 1st layer. The lightning network weakens the transactions security wether to a hackable amount or not is up for debate but the use of lightning opens bitcoin transactions to more vulnerabilities, because layer 2 is literally bypassing the first layer. Your arguing that the first layer is the most secure way then also arguing that nothing can happen within the lightning layer which can weaken the transactions and therefore the transaction on layer 1. Example the til bot getting hacked 2 weeks ago. If POW is the king you can’t then export its transactions to a second layer and claim they’re still as safe?

mmgen-py

> Sort of. It's not really a puzzle. Whatever. Yeah, I've always hated the use of the word "puzzle" to describe POW. It's a digital needle in a haystack, not a puzzle. Not really such a hard concept to understand.

leroy46

POW leads to outrages fees for the average Joe using Crypto. This is also not an option on the long run. Also the average Joe can't do POW and POS seems a better option, self custody will become easier and more profitable (compared to exchanges).

varikonniemi

stop with that brainwashed incorrect talking point. POW is the best thing for the environemnt because it accelerates transition to renewable energy and minimizes wasting energy.

Nostalg33k

POW should allocate all this power to do something useful like protein folding

MilesPower

The argument is though that other chains are catching up and learning from ETH's mistakes. ETH was never supposed to be the bitcoin killer, it was always going to be something else, but there are 1000s of other projects coming through now as "ETH killers". As the space has evolved it's become incredibly apparent that the reason BTC is so valuable is because of its decentralised network and POW mining. When ETH goes POS and the miners need to find another profitable project I expect we will see a drop in ETH interest much like BTC has now. Nobody new to the space gives a shit about BTC anymore as it's impossible to mine and too expensive. People will look elsewhere and ETH's early success will be drowned out by other projects.

samskiter

With POS you also have a chance of mining a coin too. It's proportional to your stake. Just as with POW your chance of mining a coin is proportional to your compute effort. Seriously this is basics.

Moment_of_Inertia

Because they hold coins by staking, they essentially ARE the network. In comparison, a bad actor who is POW mining can be blacklisted by nodes (nodes and miners are separated under POW) such that nodes ignore any blocks the bad actor mines, if majority nodes agree to do so. Separation of power, checks and balances.

LebronOfRhyme_

Bitcoin and POW does not “waste” any electricity.

Amichateur

A POS chain cannot be bootstrapped in a fully decentralized network, while a POW chain can thanks to the rule that amongst several competing the chain all following the protocol rules, the chain with the most work os the valid one. In POS, in case of a network split or temporary internet shutdown, if you reboot your full node, you couldn't tell which of the offered chains is the true one.

JmunE204

POS is fundamentally the same as POW except the costly, scarce resource in this case are the coins on the network rather than hash rate. If you want to dominate the Bitcoin mining scene, and control the consensus of the network you just have to spend an unobtainable amount on ASICS and energy or band with other large players. The same is true for both consensus protocols. Really not sure what else you were trying to say in your essay. It read like a 6th grader frantically scribbling his paper on the bus due first period.

Fit-Boomer

Bitcoin and raven coin are the only two POW I know of.

nemicho85

Check out the Vite chain. Feeless with POW you can do on your phone for transactions. Up and coming Dex there as well. Been playing in that space for a week now and have been making a killing on new token listings on their dex. Vite only as an $85m market cap so plenty of room to grow.

ShitPump420

Thanks for the explanation. What about the energy usage? Is there a fix for the POW power consumption issue? I'd like to buy back into BTC, but I feel the energy issue is going to come back to haunt us again. Any info you have on that front would be appreciated

wearelosing

If bitcoin would move to POS tomorrow I would still mine on the POW chain. You do you.

megu111

POW more fair? Yeah, sure. Go buy an ASIC in your country and try to make it work with electricity costs.

formal-explorer-2718

>My node and that of all the other non-mining nodes would reject the blocks from the attacker. How would you know when a block is from the attacker? >honest miners and the rest of the validating nodes will simply fork the chain, effectively thwarting the attack Sure, but an attacker with 51% hashing power could attack that chain again. >POW is secure because a 51% attack is crazy expensive It's expensive thanks to funding from new Bitcoin issuance. As issuance approaches zero, it becomes only as expensive as the total network fees. > But what if all the central banks decided to take over? Not so far fetched anymore, since they can print infinite money. Wouldn't it be cheaper to rent 51% of the mining capacity? You just have to outspend what the Bitcoin investors paying the miners. > billionaires and the rich would have an easier time dominating because they could more easily collude and coordinate A handful of Bitcoin miners make up >50% of the network hash rate. Is it less bad if they collude?

King-ston-2000

I would also highly suggest taking a look at SYSCOIN, it has the solution of ETH that will increase security and reduce gas fees. In addition, as SYSCOIN leverage on the POW for security. There NEVM smart contract enables it to be more scalable for NFT marketplace like LUXY to run successfully on their network.

Ventibtcplease

POW is far better. Imagine this: Proof of Stake is like having your treadmill plugged in, and so you count because it’s plugged in and it’s on. If you buy a shit ton of treadmills and plug them in, you’re good to go and can dominate. This effect cascades, and the rich accumulate and accumulate and accumulate, etc… Proof of Work is like getting a treadmill, turning it on, BUT you need to run on it to make it “work.” It makes you actually work for it rather than buying it. One man can do so much, no matter the amount of money he has. True democratization and security from any system overtake.

Swoleattorney

Imagine how many coins Satoshi would have if Bitcoin was POS. The account would do nothing but collect coins. The POS people say it leads to more decentralization but really it benefits those who have a lot wayyy more than those who have little. It's like the cantiillion effect with the early adopters having a significant and continued advantage. With Bitcoin, the OGs are obviously doing well but if they want more they are paying the same rate that I'm paying. POW ensures if the early adopters want more they have to take action. If It was POS they could sit on the sidelines and fill their coffers.

alphaqu2twice

Been mining it myself. One of the few POW coins still mineable.

cmplieger

What a cop out and condescending comment. Bitcoin has value because people assign value to it like any other asset. The consequences of that in the physical world is a byproduct of its pre-existing value, not the other way around. in 2012 no one would have gone out to set up a power plant in the middle of a desert because of bitcoin. There is no reason any other chain, POS or POW cannot provide tokens/coins for real-world actions if they choose to. Ex: you play a video game, your time and physical interactions get translated into that game's token incentivizing real world behavior.

ComprehensiveTart556

kadena best new POW CHAIN 🚀

evilMTV

The main point here is POS vs POW, premine isn't something unique to or dependent on POS. You're just comparing cryptos with premined coins vs Bitcoin.

polloponzi

> but can someone please explain why POW is much superior and POS is doomed to fail? Because POS seems to be the new cool kid on the block. POW is more fair. POS is the same shit we have had all those centuries. With POS you are basically saying "the rich will become richer.. so the more coins you have the more you will get" With POW tou are saying "hard workers will earn money". Think for a moment in El Salvador. They are leveraing their volcano energy to mine Bitcoin and to earn lot of Bitcoins that will make them richer. Do you think they could do the same with POS? They don't have enough fiat money to buy enough coins.. they just have undervalued natural resources that they can leverage thanks to hard earned work, and that should prevail if we want a fairer civilization.

skeptical-0ptimist

Both POS and POW attempt to secure their networks by adding a cost to any attack. POW does this by requiring a large amount of "off chain" investment. An attack would require a large amount of electricity and computer equipment to execute. POS adopts a number of different approaches ranging from... in algorand you could attack by owning half the supply, the question is after acquiring half, would you want to sink it? Etherium will use a slashing approach.. If a bad block is added then part of the stake used to collateralize that block will be burned. IMO... the POS method has some interesting properties, but the implementations can vary so much you can't really equate one POS chain with another... there are reasons to think POS can be more secure but this is largely unproven for now. POW is straightforward and is more battle tested than POS.

100_Jose_Maria_001

There are a few misunderstandings with this comparison. First, a 51% attack is expensive, inefficient, and hard to maintain. It is a common misconception that having 51% of the hashing power gives you "control" over the network. That is not the case. What it grants you, is the statistical chance to find blocks faster than the honest chain. But here is the kicker: miners do the cryptographic work, but full nodes ran by people like me at home are the ones that validate the blocks. My node and that of all the other non-mining nodes would reject the blocks from the attacker. That means they would wasting millions of dollars in electricity, but getting no Bitcoin in return. The longer they do this, the more money they waste. Meanwhile, honest miners and the rest of the validating nodes will simply fork the chain, effectively twarting the attack. Mind you, this kind of attack has been tried during the block size wars of 2017. Users running validating nodes won that war decisively over miners who controlled more than 50% of the hashrate, and who tried to change the rules so that Bitcoin would be more centralized. In short, POW is secure because a 51% attack is crazy expensive, gives u no guarantee of control, and has to overcome many layers of resistance. First you have to overcome the decentralized has rate. Then you have to overcome the decentralized user base running validating nodes at home. This is why an attack on Bitcoin is not feasible, and states have not tried it. How do we know it's secure? Bitcoin still exists. Because if states could take down Bitcoin, they would have done so already. Now let's think of POS. If Bitcoin was to adopt POS, u are right, anyone trying to buy 51% of the supply would seem ludicrous. But what if all the central banks decided to take over? Not so far fetched anymore, since they can print infinite money. Even if no one bought 51% of the supply, billionaires and the rich would have an easier time dominating because they could more easily collude and coordinate than millions of plebs who hold a few million Satoshis. That in itself would centralize power over Bitcoin tremendously. All they need is to make one change, and they could unravel the very carefully crafted balance of power that makes the Bitcoin ecosystem so decentralized. POS on chains without a supply cap (basically every other cryptocurrency in existence) is even worse of an idea, because they can simply inflate your shares to oblivion. Maintaining your share of power within POS entails increasing ur share at the same pace as the increase in the supply. Between premine and everything else, it is hard to see how plebs would have ANY kind of control over a POS network. It sounds like the dollar system, to be honest. I hope this clarifies your question.

generateduser29128

Lightning requires a settlement layer and would not work as a standalone network. Why would it add another POW/POS layer on top of an already sufficiently secure base layer? That makes no sense.

413-

“Favor every single one who performs real work” is a bit of a overstatement. You can also argue that “the richest” will eventually control the majority of POW network since they have more funds to invest in the hardware

tz22rz

I haven't thought about the issue much but offhand POS seems like it's vulnerable to govt attack and collusion. It requires people to actually have the coin. So you arrest about 10,000 people that are the majority holders--what happens? You can arrest all miners in POW and the difficulty will just adjust and people will still mine with their cpus.

DadofHome

It’s about miners( hash rate/ power) not about whales - POW does not care how much u own.

examples_

All layer 2s are less secure than the base layer 1. Bitcoin is the most secure and decentralized network because of POW. When someone gets hacked no one shuts down bitcoin or forks it so they can get their coins back like on ETH or any of the other centralized layer 1 coins. POW is decentralized because electricity/energy is decentralized. POS is not decentralized when the coins are >51% pre-mined like almost every other alt-coin.

godofleet

POW Mining a huge investment with tons of competition and it's driving all of those miners to find the cheapest, greenest energy supply possible. It requires endless upkeep and upgrades. And at the end of the day, the WHOLE network decides the future of bitcoin, not only the people who devoted the most capital upfront. Lookup the blocksize wars, Bitcoin has entrenched itself firmly in the "for the people, by the people" mantra... Mining scale/profit does not correlate to democratic voice on the network. POS is just the opposite, the more you have the more you make... No work was done or energy spent to prove what is real... Have more of the coin and you have a louder voice. It's not democratic (but will pretend to be) it's closer to our current oligarchies because there is nothing grounding it in reality. Bitcoin is nature, math + energy... It's as hard as an store of value can get IMO. Look up neomorphic design (I think that's the word) - cars didn't have steering wheels for ~30 years, we used leather straps pulled through the frame to steer... This poor design cloned from horse drawn carts was eventually replaced by a simpler, safer wheel... But it goes go show how the design of a new system can be influenced by existing systems and that it's not always the best solution to just copy-pasta. One thing remains true, fiat is unsustainable, we can't rely on the rich and powerful to progress our species with out massive suffering, slavery (or near it) and unsustainable consumption... It's like this because of centralization of power, POW, in particular BTC addresses that directly, POS is a play for power... IMO, cheers.

cryptoham135

No, it does create centralisation in POS because those using the network are often losing out in tokens to those just purely staking, also those not staking lose out. However POW isn’t much better as those that create the cheapest electric or can steal it or use wasted electric gain an advantage and therefore can benefit from economies of scale.

Ernest-Everhard42

POW is old tech. Saylor will say anything to shill bitty. However, old tech doesn’t necessarily make it bad tech. But POS is the future in my rat brain opinion.

thebigeljay

Old Guard POW coins will last. DASH, ETC, LTC, BCH, BTC DOGE will last. ETH will last if they fix the tps issue. I don't think POS is the answer though. I think they should focus on L2 to scale and leave ETH as POW L1.

brob2026

Great explanation. But isn't it easier and cheaper to take over 51% of the hashrate than to buy 51% of all bitcoin? In this case, POW is more susceptible to a 51% attack because for POS this scales with the marketcap and not the hashrate? Sorry if I'm missing something, just trying to understand.

lazarus_free

In POW any block generates the hash after the next block. In order to become the longest chain you have to have the valid hashes of all the previous blocks. That means that in order to change a transaction that happened a week ago you have to do the work and validate all the blocks since then. You can't just change one block there without validating all others on top because you would either not have the longest chain or have an invalid one. That means that a Bitcoin transaction becomes exponentially more expensive to change as time passes. Making it more secure. In POS the only way you can identify the longest chain is by whoever has the highest stake tells you that is the valid chain. And those validators have a very high power to alter things. Also in POW everyone can enter and start mining. But what if in POS the validators decide to keep staking and increase their power therefore compounding even more their stake? It is a receipt for centralisation. In POW doesn't matter what miners do with their BTC anyone else can invest and start competing with them.

cMVjwDjN2OwoJm0DYn86

>POW favors every single one who performs REAL WORK. POS favors those who are already „the richest“ in the network…which is what we already have now in our actual monetary system, in which those upper few percent have the power. I don't see how PoW doesn't just make the rich richer, just like PoS or our current monetary system. Start with $100M in capital, buy a huge mining farm, make big profits, buy more miners. Start with $1000 and you'll get nowhere with PoW either, or at least extremely slowly. Same applies to PoS.

alexor1976

As long as they stay clear of POW chains thzre shouldn’t be any problems

Ninjanoel

Zilliqa, I own it and am earning from staking, but it's barely 3rd gen, ecosystem is lagging cause it's not EVM compatible and transactions take minutes where other 3rd generation blockchains take seconds. And it still uses POW in places.

7LayerMagikCookieBar

Eth validators are not the same as Solana's. Solana's are more equivalent to Eth full nodes because they are physical machines. Ethereum validators are not machines -- you can run thousands on one machine. Solana has ~1200 and Beacon Chain a reported ~4500 or so (node crawlers somewhat underreport though but to what extent I'm not sure). Also have to keep stake distribution in mind. https://twitter.com/larry0x/status/1422480942711689229?t=Kw2AoQ3zDuaXjbuLEnF2hQ&s=19 https://medium.com/etherscan-blog/beacon-chain-d-d-34bae4885e75?s=09 Then for Ethereum POW https://ethernodes.org/history

humanbeing21

That's sad. I really wish they would have a plan to move on from POW. It's so inefficient

TrivAndLetDie

A POW coin that can ONLY be mined from a renewable, preferably off-grid source. Software can't verify the generator? No mining.

octaw

Wtf how can you stake a POW coin?

AdministrationNo5161

Fortune favours the brave but that’s has to include patience. See the potential, lay your foundation and POW before you know it!🙌

banaca4

POW

zabutter

POW wil prevail over POS (Piece of Shit)

Mattsputin

Now we can post even more Crypto memes even faster. I feel like POW Cryptos will eventually fade out.

Conversiongfx

Is mining a non POW coin possible?

GoldenSonned

Fair enough. But at least they have a community which is not the case for a lot of privacy coins. Zano is also pretty interesting (POS + POW)

flarept1

What a shit tier news website. Vechain was never POW. "Vechain the popular supply management blockchain used to be Proof of Work based chain. And recently they made change to the Proof of Authority."

stink_bot

>POW "Prisoners Of War?"

Mordan

fools. real digital scarcity was invented by Satoshi with POW

Kike328

POW has already been discarded for almost every coin, even eth is switching, we all should as a community condemn Bitcoin for being so retrograde and polluting

americanarmyknife

Not bad, OP. Even more efficient POW would be converting shit energy (bad headspace, anger, standard life woes) into something productive and/or valuable. Making lemonade when you're given lemons.

cryptoham135

This argument baffles me, just because other systems use more energy doesn’t mean make your system have a free pass to be wasteful. If i was running my heating flat out with the door open claiming that hotels use more energy me than me it’d make me a moron. Whilst i think you’re also making the point that POW is wasteful and other systems should be adopted ? If so i agree with you.

rorowhat

Solana is not minable. Most newer coins are POS and not POW.

basic_user321

There is no POW right now that will bring you ROI sooner that 8-12 months, so if you're going to do this be prepared for lots of experimentation, wrong hardware baugt, and tedtllsting a bunch of altcoins six months later when eth2 possible arrives

Mirved

Nowhere did I say it was. That is the whole point. PoS wastes less energy and is more efficient. That POW wastes a lot of energy doesn't make it better or worth more. It's use is still the same. Well slower and with less options.