Proof of Work or Proof of Stake?

Are the normies returning? Is it time for a new bull run?

neither of them, PoW and PoS has flaws which makes them out of the market. it is necessary a new approach, which tackle the issues of these two.

You have a point , whilw pos has no 51 attacks it has the same network centralization policy and only the ones that own a lot of tokens get to have decisional power

proof of work, with PoS you just have one guy minting a large sum of coins and then spreading them saying : " this has value "

with poof of work the coins have to be mined and energy has to be put in.

PoS = closed system
POW = open system

How is PoS a closed system when anyone can participate? Additionally, we're talking about a blockchain baselayer and its functionality, not necessarily its currency.

Obelisk
Obelisk
Obelisk

>Obelisk consensus algorithm

The SkyCoin Obelisk algo is a solution to both PoW and PoS , look it up here. The theoretical work is more than promising

medium.com/skycoin/skycoin-obelisk-8cc32bc9ca37

PoW
+ value of the coin partially pegged to the energy needed to produce it
+ easy onboarding (just launch a computer and install a software)
+ embeded liquidity mechanism (miners have to sell some to repay their bills) encouraging distribution
- energy intensive
- ASICs generating soft centralization (can only be changed if a new actor comes with equal or better ASICs)

PoS
+ energy saving
- no correlation with real world commodity
- hard onboarding (have to buy the coin and stake them)
- no embeded liquidity mechanisms with awfully shitty distribution
- staking generating hard centralization (can't be changed unless you hardfork big holders)

Proof of stake is absolutely dogshit, it basically replicates the current problem of central banking where a bunch of entities control the creation money.
Sure PoW is not perfect (mostly because it pollutes) but it's economically way better than PoS.
Best solution would be Proof of Useful Work where the work generated has a use beyond securing the network.

Attached: consider.jpg (600x600, 29K)

All PoW projects will turn into shit shows, because the main purpose of them will be for miners to milk everyone else. Take BTC for instance, useless slow as fuck piece of shit, which needs millions of $ injected each month just keep the price at current levels.

PoS is the futures. It removes miners and allows plebs to participate in a much more meaningful way

Not long ago I couldn’t stand hearing abot pre-mined coins but i soon came to realize that if you calculate your coin distribution and align it with user growth we might get rid of the market inflation .

Proof of what, what is all this nerd talk. I bought my coins from an ICO.

Delusion, you will just give more powers to whales to manipulate the market.
PoS is a centralization fest.

I would even go further.
Most of the electronic devices r used for around 20% of time. Rest of the day, they just sit down and do nothing.
I.e. im mining nimiq on argon2d cpu algo, and there were like 7-10 different hardware devices in my bro company that were unused for like last two years. Now they give +150kh/s.
W r transiting to clean energy..cold fusion is around the corner. Hate when ppl complain about energy consumption of crypto yet dont complain when.most of the normies use their smartfon to play retarded vidya and watch porn.

PoW! The PoS coins all come from ICOs...U would prefer my crypto stays crypto & out of the remit of the SEC....

PoW for distribution, available only during small time windows each day to avoid wasting electricity all day
PoS for consensus, with suitable algorithm rules to avoid nothing-at-stake and centralization tendencies

The best part about sky is that they modified the algorithm so to give fair distribution across its web of trust. Practically they cut out mining for a more user friendly approach, every node on their network can subscribe to other trut worthy nodes . The influence across the network is gained by having more subscribers. It really seems more reliable than pow and pos

Most PoS does start off centralised but should be quite diluted after a couple of years. Its too early to say that it can never work.

PoW is also highly centralised at this point

>Best solution would be Proof of Useful Work where the work generated has a use beyond securing the network.
Useful proof-of-work misaligns incentives. See page 7 of this document by Andrew Poelstra (lots of good info in here on PoW, ASICs, etc.): download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/asic-faq.pdf

PoW promotes centralization because of efficiencies of scale
PoS just scales linearly with stake, so having more doesn't make you any more efficient

PoS is actually LESS centralizing

cardano solved those problems with POS with Ouroboros - and they are implementing it as we write this. end of the day all systems will have a tradeoff profile, different strengths, different weaknesses. both POW and POS will be with us in the future.

too simplistic user, maybe with some coins

You're looking at it solely in the form of a currency, but think wider. For example, Ethereum going PoS means it will be
>faster and more reliable
>much more expensive to attack
>not reliant on miners to function
>not gobbling energy indefinitely to function
All of which improve the platform greatly.

>PoW for distribution, available only during small time windows each day
This could work. Make a 10 second blocktime using PoS, but after 3000 or so blocks allow one block generating fresh coins using PoW.

>hey guys its really annoying having to pay for security with work right?
yea!
>oh hai newbie, let me introduce you to the revolution in blockchain we call "SOMETHING FOR NOTHING" aka proof of stake. that's right! we've disproven thermodynamics!

the absolute state of new friends

The utility companies would probably hate it, having a 10-30 second power surge every hour. But maybe that would just be priced in...

How can you say PoS is not about centralization while the same thing that happened to PoW (miners , energy and hardware providers took over the network) is happening to PoS but with a different class of people( major stakeholders decide all the changes to the system)

>putting your wealth at stake is "nothing"

The hour of the day is the most important element of the energy bill . Smart meetering systems are able to give lower price if you use energy at a low consumtion hour for the network and high prices for the peak energy consumption of the day. I don t care about energy providers until they prove to be green and fair priced ( which will take a while) so start portioning your energy bill smarter

PoW causes centralization because the marginal costs decrease the more you invest. You invest twice as much, you gain more than twice as much because the fixed costs rise less. That means centralization wins.

PoS does not in itself cause that, because the marginal cost will stay exactly constant at any scale. You invest twice as much, you gain exactly twice as much. That means there is no incentive in centralization.

Of course if you have more money you'll still gain more money, but that's the same as the stock market or bond market or anything else. Linear scaling of gains is the best you can do ever to combat centralization. If you scale higher, you promote centralization. If you scale lower than linear, the stakes would just be broken up into smaller stakes but still operated by the same entity, so you gain nothing regarding decentralization.

So, scaling gains linearly with stake is the best you can do for decentralization. And PoS can scale linearly. PoW always scales higher than linear.

Yeah but it would have to be the same hour worldwide, and would need to be random, so that doesn't really help.

If you think that scalability is important in the crypto biz you should check out Fiber . From what i ve read they propose both horizontal and vertical scalability.
You might be interested in checking it out.
medium.com/skycoin/skycoin-fiber-platform-bf64debfc60f

>No.10887430
that`s not true, every country has its own energy grid . Of course , in theory we should all consume energy by the most efficient pattern but that doesn t happen and most regulatory demands in the sector have different national consumption hours due to GMT and consumption infrastructure

>"stake" your money
>get it all back
>spent nothing (actually get paid)

you're right user, it isn't nothing, it's WORSE: proof of stake faggots think money grows on trees, they think they can get security for less than free

good god u faggots are retarded

While it's being staked, it's tied up and you can't use it otherwise, so you have opportunity costs for not being able to invest it elsewhere.

So it's not free money unless you're a brainlet who doesn't understand opportunity costs.

this whole argument is retarded. kys corecuck

Except you don't get it back if you try to fuck with the system. People are financially incentivized to keep the system running. If I attack a PoW blockchain and fail, then I will simply have wasted some electricity, but I'll get to keep my principal investment, which is the hardware. If I attack a PoS blockchain and fail, then I will lose everything invested towards the attack.

it is just me, or some of you are trapped on PoW& PoS and don't talk about Obelisk, designed to overcome PoW and PoS?

Are you talking about the obelisk ASIC miners? That's just PoW...

Obelisk consensus algorithm the Fiber platform along with the contributions of CX and their node network provide the most promising context for scalability. I hope their future products are design with the same original Satoshi vision

No, I am talking about Obelisk designed as a trust-based mesh network in which each node randomly connects several upstream nodes and downstream nodes, spreading the influence of the nodes and avoiding BTC centralization. Replaces POW and POS with a web of trust.

Some visualization on Obelisk.

Attached: 2018-07-03 19.23.54.jpg (975x538, 82K)

Obelisk has nothing to do with the proof of work algorithm. It has been designed specifically to adress the problems PoS and PoW provide. Obelisk has a node to node web of trust and position across the market is settled by the influence (no. Of subscribers)one node has on the network

so basically Proof of Popularity? Gonna need to see some game theoretical papers on that concept.

Popularity has nothing to do with trust . Trust means that your private data remains safe . Here is a link to the SkyCoin WhitePaper where you can find more details

Is your question based on the fact that you want to join the mining community?

>No.10887140
Here:

steemkr.com/bitcoin/@bivins1/skycoin-the-most-undervalued-cryptocurrency-in-the-crypto-space

an article which explain exactly what are the issues with PoW and PoS, and why Obelisk is something to be considered.

scamcoin bagholders, everyone

actually denying thermodynamics in a desperate attempt to save their bags

PoS, obviously.
PoW is absolutely unsustainable at current prices. $5B/year just for bitcoin, a big fraction of it goes to electricity. It's very hard to get that kind of money continously.
It scales with price... Bitcoin at $600k = $500B/year. Impossible.
ETH is still pure PoW... it's going to PoS only in 2020 :/

None of the above still waiting for a cheaper and more reliable solution

Yea right , like a new concept would be from start better than what is already in use , tested and upgraded

what do you mean by cheaper? how can be an algorithm cheaper?

>no argument

Casper might actually be implemented as early as this year, and probably mid-2019 at the latest. Sharding is the thing that's scheduled for 2020.

>Casper might actually be implemented as early as this year
No chance.
Last I checked they haven't even decided on VRF.
The optimistic timeline is hard fork in ~Nov 2019. The realistic timeline is ~June 2020.

>faster and more reliable
It won't, PoS brings nothing on the table in this aspect
>much more expensive to attack
Debatable, it will all depend on the numbers of validating nodes, with PoS there is much more intensive to DDOS a node than with PoW. Also the fact that block generators are picked in a deterministic manner is a really complicated matter
>not reliant on miners to function
How is it good really?
Miners are a counterpower to whales and developers, they have an interest to keep the coin relatively stable over a certain threshold because of their costs. PoS is giving the keys of the networks to the whales which would have even more power on the market to pump and dump it, this is a really dirty system.
>not gobbling energy indefinitely to function
That's the only good point of PoS right now.

>You're looking at it solely in the form of a currency, but think wider
Currency is the alpha and omega of blockchain, without it it's just a shitty database.
The fundamental problem with Ethereum is that Vitalik and co really just really created a slightly pimped clone of Bitcoin and bluntly put a virtual machine on top of it, they should better focus on developing second layers to put the EVM on instead of messing with the base chain.

Attached: ThinkingPepe.jpg (640x519, 29K)

>It won't, PoS brings nothing on the table in this aspect
PoW has exponential time distribution of block times, PoS can have uniform. In practice this means you can have blocks that take ~50% of block time to verify on PoS, on PoW it's more like 1%.
That's a massive increase.
>Miners are a counterpower to whales and developers
miners are a fucking cancer that care about nothing else but getting high inflation. High inflation is killing eth and all they do is whine. They even had the gall to propose an increase to 5 ETH block reward from 3 ETH.

>It won't, PoS brings nothing on the table in this aspect
PoW is reliant on miners constantly mining it, if profitability falls, then so will the hashrate, and thus, also the speed of it. PoS doesn't suffer from this flaw.
>Debatable, it will all depend on the numbers of validating nodes
Considering that PoS systems can require 80%+ of the staked coins to attacked, then it will be pretty much impossible to do so. Anyone trying to gather the necessary amount of coins will have to pay massively due to slippage and will then just make all of that worthless when he attacks the network. The incentives to attack a PoS network are pretty much nonexistent.
>How is it good really?
It's good due to the reason I mentioned above that processing transactions is not tied to the block time.
>Currency is the alpha and omega of blockchain
For now, yes. It is needed to draw people in and build a sufficient base for further innovation. But once that base has been reached, then the sky's the limit.
>they should better focus on developing second layers to put the EVM on instead of messing with the base chain.
Vitalik has actually said as much just recently, the base chain should be more stable and most of the innovation should happen in second layer solutionsl.

>if profitability falls, then so will the hashrate, and thus, also the speed of it
That's not correct, difficulty goes down and block times go back to where it was before.

But that won't happen right away. Bitcoin, the largest PoW blockchain, requires 2016 blocks to be minted before difficulty readjusts. And if the hashrate drops by a lot, then those could be some sloooow ass blocks.

This is inherent to Bitcoin, not PoW at large, lots of PoW coins have difficulty readjustement every minute on an average of few hours.

If Bitcoin is ever at $600k that would be a marketcap of close to 10 trillions dollars which means either:
1) it is now the official world currency
or
2) The dollar had Weimar tier hyper inflation

500B/year is a bullshit number btw, people would throw the money into chips way before this happen.

>BTC transfers more value than all but the top 3
>useless
Hey Paul, could you fax me that thought?

Attached: 0F319542-62A1-4763-A0D4-0C65FE80F2E7.jpg (990x718, 173K)

Apple has a market cap of 1.07T.
If not for PoW bitcoin could hit 10T easily due to a massive discrepancy between float and total supply.
It wouldn't make it a world currency, just a massive bubble.
Inflation adjusted, the South Sea bubble peaked at 4T.
these numbers are wrong, these are correct:
blockchain.com/charts/estimated-transaction-volume-usd?timespan=all
I know why though, they didn't subtract change addresses like retards.
I actually imported blockchain's data in excel and computed the correct total:
Bitcoin 2017 $365B
Interestingly, thanks to the ICO boom, the sum for ethereum transfers in 2017 is $1T.

Proof of Feet > PoW & PoS.

what is this, oppaitime?

Cardano POS is coming this year - Casper 2 years after that

Btc consensus algorithm, PoW, gets the miners into a race and a few have the technology to remain in the race and earn, therefore we have mining pools/mining farms owned by a small group (mostly Chinese, about 20 of this kind, an issue itself).There are already alternatives to these problems tackled by those who participated in eth&btc development but choose another path, an approach close to Satoshi's idea. The solution is definitely Obelisk.

PoC..Burst is best answer

elaborate