Which side do you choose and why?

PoW is more inclined towards how nature is setup.

PoS fails over and over again, eg the kings son becoming the new king but he's a retard even with the stake he got and he does not come to the level of his dad. That won't happen with a Work/Merit based system.

"Work" is in general how the world is setup. So it's really a no-brainer.

PoW for decentralization and mining cartels
PoS for decentralization and scaling

Hybrid - extra security and no secret minting

choose Decred

Attached: Decred.jpg (1201x631, 240K)

Do what you want, but beware of the newfags & the power argument...Fiat wastes WAY more power & enslaves people.

As I said PoW is the only crypto, everything else is a scam.

>why not both?

Are you drawing an analogy to owning a hummer and a prius a la wozniak so they equal out their carbon footprint?

proof of stake because there is lower barrier to entry in saving and it's sound money making itself sound. proof of work is wasteful energy wise and inherently promotes centralization due to economies of scale efficiency wise, and even when it is so profitable efficiency doesn't matter much, all the lil guys are basically working for pools anyway, so its still highly centralized.

there is also the "little at stake" problem when mining hardware can be reused on other blockchains after an attack. This is why no POW mined blockchain that isn't the by far biggest hashrate wise is safe from attack. Ethereum is pretty safe atm because GPUs can't be used efficiently to mine bitcoin long term and the runner up GPU POW mined is valueless. This will change when decentralized compute worker pools and markets exist and reach a state of profitability.

In regards to bitcoin, it's only vulnerable against other chains that uses sha256 because asics are the majority of hashpower. Forks of itself is the main threat POW wise. Miners ultimately can decide.

>eg the kings son becoming the new king but he's a retard even with the stake he got and he does not come to the level of his dad.
only really matters when chain governance is tied to the POS system. It's not when it comes to ethereum. POS stakers have little political power and a cartel of 51% is much much much more difficult to accomplish than a cartel of 51% of a pow chain's hash power.

yeah and also all a cartel would be able to do is to undermine the security and trust in the blockchain and thus ruin the value of their own asset, which is stupid. they only have destructive power.

If governance isnt tied to stake in pos then who is it tied to

Anyone who says proof of stake is better is a complete fucking brainlet. Including every faggot in this thread, vitality, and any other retard dev/founder who’s shilling this as their mechanism of choice

Attached: A332C999-89B1-4BDC-A32F-F550D811B96D.jpg (473x512, 37K)

Vitalik*

Proof of stake is the same as PoW if PoW currency is dominant

Yeah PoS is even more centralised than PoW. Nothing is preventing whales to stake multiple nodes and control the network.

POS

PoS is a ponzi house of cards
eventually someone will decide it's time to exit before someone else does and it's a race to the bottom

If proof of stake was better Satoshi would have used it. Instead he chose the superior PoW. Stakefags in disbelief

Kings have been a feature of human society for tens of thousands of years. Centralisation generally works, but distrubited ledger is by definition decentralised.
Not everything needs to be on the blockchain

Proof of cock hahaha

PoW will remain for bitcoin.
All other protocols will switch to PoS because it's just much more secure.

Governments can shut PoS down by arresting whales. If miners are arrested they're replaced with miners on the other side of the world.

Dumb argument, everyone can stake from everywhere.
The bigger issue with PoS is that it discourages liquidity.

It’s not just that...IT WONT WORK YOU FUCKING RETARDS

MONEY REQUIRES A COST. YOU CANT HAVE A SELF-CONTAINED SYSTEM BE VALUABLE. ANYONE SAYING PROOF OF WORK WASTES ENERGY IS A RETARD WHO DOESNT UNDERSTAND CRYPTO. ANY PROOF OF STAKE CODE NO MATTER HOW FANCY WILL HAVE AN EXPLOITABLE BUG AND WILL GET REKT IN ADVERSE CONDITIONS

bitcoin is extremely robust to things like network outages, massive Sybil attacks, 51% attacks. Under these extreme scenarios proof of stake is exploitable

Mark my words, proof of stake if implemented without proof of work will DESTROY ethereum, regardless of what the autists working on it say. It’s not about the math, it’s about human nature and how the network operates under black swans

There is NO way of getting around the fact that money requires a serious sacrifice. Energy behind btc is not wasted energy you fucking retards, it is in fact the most EFFICIENT expenditure of energy there is

Also proof of stake is more centralized, and the rich will always get richer under that scenario

Attached: 5A95FD58-27E7-47DC-8350-FABF8E194E95.png (273x184, 7K)

Those who create wallet and node software that is used en-masse. Basically those who create what would make users choose which is "the correct fork" when someone tries to make a governance decision. They in turn defer to developer groups who discuss and negotiate what could be acceptable to all or most entities with any power, including the aforementioned entities and the enterprises that use them and of course some consideration is given to the end user because the end user is the customer who chooses what to use.

This is why they always refer to reaching "consensus" on upgrades in ethereum and bitcoin. Except it's de facto more inclusive ("decentralized" in a loose sense) and there's a higher standard of consensus due to the different governance culture. UASF segwit for example would never happen with ethereum if there was as much opposition to it from infrastructure stakeholders (not to be confused with staking or stake).

>The bigger issue with PoS is that it discourages liquidity.
The price increases to make up for it, making the liquid ethereum worth enough for there to be sufficient liquidity.

Attached: D0B52261-18D2-4C56-9E11-50A9257281FC.png (571x618, 29K)

>everyone can stake from everywhere.
That doesn't matter. Control is associated with a passive token that can be slowly accumulated by attackers. In PoW the network always has time to respond to wide scale attacks and any attacker needs to spend considerable resources. An attack that maintains a bunch of miners would be hard to justify in a government budget meeting while a small cheap task force can disable PoS chains.

So its tied to developers. Thats a totally centralised system

what the fuck do you propose then? bitcoin governance is also tied to developers. it's called off-chain governance via user software. Except, ethereum isn't held hostage by a single development team. The only big example of on-chain governance in a live network is EOS, the governance train wreck.

proof of work—preferably without any ASIC resistance
an estimate for the current lowest value of a proof of work currency is easily observable to someone who isn't a brainlet and who has access to information about the currency's current mining difficulty and the average cost of electricity for the most active miners

if there's a market for it
still, if we're just talking currency, i don't see how a system that best guarantees free and open competition that is totally without bias as to who provides that competition could be made better by cutting a giant hole in its foundation in which people who have a lot of money and are simply seeking rent can comfortably situate themselves, convinced that no work has to be done by either man or machine and that they can just make free money forever

Developer governance plays a part but miners decide who to back

not true. ouroboros proof of stake provides at least as much security - possibly more. if you disagree try and prove it to the cryptography community.

actually a 10/10 post

Proof of Work coins are backed by electricity and all the infrastructure tied to it, the internet and all the infrastructure tied to it, computer hardware and all the infrastructure tied to it.

Piece of Shit coins are backed by wishes and pixie dust, much like stocks and fiat.

ignorant and overly generalized opinion

and that's a bad thing

>MONEY REQUIRES A COST
?

Based

pow. there is no incentive to ever upgrade hardware and connectivity with pos.

No proof of stake project has done anything but dump hardcore.

>what the fuck do you propose then?
ommunity of coin holders vote on blockchain on proposals submitted to the commubity by different dev teams for new features, upgrades, projects. a true competitive landscape unhindered by cult of personality governance such as 'vitalik says'

>it hasn't worked yet therefore it is impossible

Attached: 813CE7F6-DFE3-4167-88FE-89148D6008DC.png (680x680, 221K)

money has to be backed by something in order to be valuable
you can print a whole bunch of money out of thin air—but your total supply of money will not be any more valuable than before you printed

>backed
bitcoin isn't backed by anything.
can you exchange bitcoin for electricity at a fixed rate?

yes there is. improve infrastructure, features, toolset to drive adoption and therefore demand for the crypto and therefore drive the value of stake rewards up. are you even thinking?

I hope you're all in PoS coins.
You deserve to be financially ruined.

>a true competitive landscape unhindered by cult of personality governance such as 'vitalik says'
I've followed ethereum governance discussions and its not anywhere as close to dominated by a cult of personality as you think. This is a big misconception that is happily spread and maintained by bitcoin maximalist parrots.
>backed
think thoroughly about what "backed" means.

>Thinks money is printed out of thin air
You have no idea how bad it really is!

you admit to having no argument then

you don't know what i think, and it most certainly is dominated utterly by a tightly knit cult of personality

none of this actually incentivizes upgrading from raspberry pis

Because it's the truth. PoS will never succeed in crypto.

you can opt not to sell your bitcoin when its market value goes below the cost of mining. at such a point, most miners will refrain from selling; the people who do sell have their btc bought by people who know what the current minimum cost to mine bitcoin is. the market rate of bitcoin may drop below the cost to mine for a short period of time, but with more people realizing how this actually works, it becomes increasingly unlikely that the market rate will remain below the cost to mine.
bitcoin is tied to electricity and computing power—the latter of which i had forgot to elaborate on. proof of work cryptos will massively incentivize the development of extremely cheap energy production for the purpose of mining; when the efforts to develop an extremely cheap means of energy production inevitably lead to success, the primary thing that will keep bitcoin valuable will be the cost of computational power, and the cost of maintaining and keeping safe from fire the mining equipment—and perhaps even the cost of space.

an agency's promise cannot necessarily be trusted

lel

Very high IQ post.
The PoS fans will learn in time.

Attached: 1558900980663.jpg (218x231, 6K)

>t. failed economics 101
if a company releases a t-shirt and that t-shirt flops because it's too expensive, the company won't just sit on their t-shirts forever. they discount their wares to at least recoup a portion of their investment. same goes for bitcoin.

PoS is a reddit tier scam

anything thats not POW is a scam, its no longer a decentralized blockchain....period
the charts and numbers have reflected that so far
not sure what else u need to settle this debate

Proof of stake is a huge ponzi where the rich get exponentially richer and everyone else has exponentially less chance to actually gain a foothold in the system. Proof of work is a much smaller ponzi where you actually have to do work to create money. Bitcoin is still flawed in that it has a limited supply and the early adopters still reaped the most benefits.

How is this thread so based but the rest of the board filled with chainlink/other shitcoin of the week?

Bunch of plebs ITT, PoC is the answer

Attached: 1525328955658.png (233x351, 163K)

based
>bitcoin is backed by the cost of mining
>pos is just fee money
>what is opportunity cost
evey fucking time

I think proof of stake is superior to proof of work, but this user raises good point regarding mining costs.

One thing to consider is climate change regulations are making energy more expensive, except in third world countries with no environmental regulations. All mining will be concentrated wherever energy costs are the lowest.

I see the energy burn required by proof of work as a flaw, not a feature.

For faster and cheaper transactions, as a currency, proof of stake is superior. I’ve invested in some proof of stake coins for this reason.

I believe in the long term bitcoin will become the ‘gold’ of crypto used for long terms wealth storage. A different coin with faster cheaper transactions will be adopted for day to day commerce and will act as the ‘cash’ of crypto where people only hold as much as they need for daily spending or liquid savings. I think this coin will be proof of stake coin, but bitcoin won’t go anywhere, it will be used for holding. Something else will be used for spending and commerce.

List a pos project that didn't shit the bed the precise instant it switched to pos.

Dash is one, it has a huge bubble and pop, but it’s Dash to BTC price is back to pre bubble price and seems stable. Look at crypto’s in price to BTC not USD.

It’s designed for easy anonymous transactions. It is cheap and fast and anonymous. It will gain adoption as people prefer doing actual purchases in a coin that is cheaper faster and more anonymous than bitcoins.

It has more centralized structure which is actually a benefit. It’s use case is for transactions, not for inflation hedging. Bitcoin will remain the coin for those seeking an inflation hedge. Something else will be the coin for daily purchases.

PoW
> it distributes the coins more evenly.
It will cost less when the block subsidy falls
> Proven
> Less subjective security
> Easy to prove to a node or client that work has been done
> NiPoPoW for sidechains
> Harder to attack even if wealthy. Not possible to buy 51% of hashing power at once.

PoS
> Less costly
> Reward level tricky. If very few of the total coins are stacked a single whale could 51%.
> More complex
> Subjective security. Nodes stake coins to choose chain. Nodes on not chosen chains not rewarded. Nodes on both chains punished.
> Autoreflexivity problems. Stake coins to choose chain but chain affects who has the coins.
> Possible censorship(bad) or requires randomness on chain(hard to do right)
> Either gameable by attackers or risky for honest but unlucky nodes
> Selfish stacking. Worse than selfish mining.
> Will give rise to politics on blockchain
> Staking needs hot wallets connected to the Internet. DPoS helps.

>implying that bitcoin or any other current proof-of-work cryptocurrency is tangible and that you can physically do anything with them outside of virtual use
regardless of tangibility, you can discount a ring or whatever made out of gold or some other nonperishable commodity—but we're talking about the raw nonperishable commodity here
the question is, *should* you, as the miner, discount your commodity just because someone else has, or should you realize that that minimum cost to produce that commodity is *guaranteed* to rise in the near future because of how bitcoin's PoW algorithm reacts to increases in hashing power, plus how the bitcoin mining market would react to a decrease in the cost of electricity, plus the periodic halving of block rewards—and in addition to this, at least for the short term, how interest in industrial mining is only increasing

>natural selection refines a species that runs down prey on the savanna
>generations later, it's burning fossils to destroy it's habitat ASAP so that more monies will exist in its head
proof of work is funnier

I am confused. Btg bch have experienced 51% attacks before, obviously a btc attack would be nigh impossible but theoretically why wouldnt someone be able to? Also a lot of the concerns about pos is the complexity of it. If any project will be able to do pos right certainly eth will. It seems like you prefer pow alot more

BCH and BTG use the same PoW function as BTC so they are fucked.

If you fork either change the function, implement merged mining or fucking obliterate the other fork.

Sorry. BTG uses another hash but vulnerable anyways.

crypto51.app/

The top 5 btc mining pools could 51% at any time they want if they colluded. However that would kill bitcoin forever, they are smarter than that

i think 1 pow chain (btc) rest all pos and anchor to btc in a hierarchic manner.

Do you hold Burst?

Staking leads to centralization.

supporting argument/information on this?

the amount of misinformation ITT is hilarious. read a fucking book on distributed systems and consensus you retards. or just continue to parrot shit you've read from blog posts by BTC maxis and mETH heads. your ignorance is my amusement

>everyone is stupid! haha!
this is essentially the quality of your post. why dont you give us something