rich1.0Jeremy [ARCHIVE] (npub1q8…8qwta)https://yabu.me/npub1q86n5vtxkwerzwfqza3hwls8pl8764244464talfqy2vpj0qaz6q38qwtanjumphttps://yabu.me📅 Original date posted:2021-05-07 📝 Original message:Proof-of-stake tends towards oligopolistic control, which is antithetical to bitcoin. Proof-of-stake also has some other security issues that make it a bad substitute for Proof-of-work with respect to equivocation (reorgs). Overall you'll find me *personally* in the camp that it's OK to explore non-PoW means of consensus long term that can keep the network in consensus in a more capital efficient manner, but that proof-of-stake is not such a substitute. Other Bitcoiners will disagree with this invariably, but if you truly have a novel solution for Byzantine Generals, it would be a major contribution to not just Bitcoin but the field of computer science as a whole and would likely get due consideration. What's difficult is that Bitcoin PoW has some very specific properties that may or may not be desirable around e.g. fairness that might be difficult to ensure in other systems, so there is probably more to the puzzle than just consensus. -- @JeremyRubin <https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin> <https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin> On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 3:50 PM SatoshiSingh via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Hello list, > > I am a lurker here and like many of you I worry about the energy usage of > bitcoin mining. I understand a lot mining happens with renewable resources > but the impact is still high. > > I want to get your opinion on implementing proof of stake for bitcoin > mining in future. For now, proof of stake is still untested and not battle > tested like proof of work. Though someday it will be. > > In the following years we'll be seeing proof of stake being implemented. > Smaller networks can test PoS which is a luxury bitcoin can't afford. > Here's how I see this the possibilities: > > 1 - Proof of stake isn't a good enough security mechanism > 2 - Proof of state is a good security mechanism and works as intended > > IF PoS turns out to be good after battle testing, would you consider > implementing it for Bitcoin? I understand this would invoke a lot of > controversies and a hard fork that no one likes. But its important enough > to consider a hard fork. What are your opinions provided PoS does work? > > Love from India. > _______________________________________________ > 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/20210507/bdc3653f/attachment.html>