Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

nameless_pattern t1_iz9ruff wrote

Reply to comment by igby1 in Ethereum’s energy switch saves as much electricity as entire Ireland uses | The success of The Merge concept may now serve as a roadmap to enable a switch from Proof of Work to Proof of Stake in Bitcoin. by chrisdh79

Pos requires more complex features, mainly computation. Bitcoin doesn't do this, this simplicity could make it more secure depending on who you ask.

Edit: how "decentralized" and secure each blockchain is actively debated and is in the realm of semantics, philosophy, computer science and organisational theory.

Anyone who speaks of a clear and simple answer based on only a few metrics is probably very biased and/or ignorant.

If they could prove what they said they would be insanely rich, and not spending time debating on the internet.

eth and btc have different abilities, stated goals, and management structures.

20

ItsAConspiracy t1_iz9z4wr wrote

There are tradeoffs. On the one hand, PoS is more complicated. On the other, PoS gives you the option of applying penalties instead of just rewards. It's like you can respond to a large attacking miner by burning down their mining rig. This happens in Ethereum's PoS automatically in response to certain specific attacks.

8

ResoluteClover t1_iza5l2j wrote

Doesn't POS enable those with more to control the whole thing?

4

ItsAConspiracy t1_iza8ju5 wrote

No more than big miners control Bitcoin.

2

lxer t1_izd1gka wrote

False, miners do not control bitcoin. That is the whole point. Ofc you are playing a semantic trick by saying Big miners, but what you really mean is a 51% attack, which requires in practise an even larger percentage to maintain the longest chain (about 70% hashpower), so that is not going to happen.

4

ResoluteClover t1_iza8r2c wrote

Just very directly.

1

ItsAConspiracy t1_iza99c7 wrote

Ethereum's stakers play exactly the role that Bitcoin's miners play. They have no special governance rights or abilities. Some other blockchains do give stakers special governance rights but Ethereum does not.

4

BassmanBiff t1_izaz2hn wrote

Most of cryptocurrency is this way: responding to the problems of modern financial systems by streamlining them and labeling it a feature.

1

ResoluteClover t1_izaz9fo wrote

Stream lining the problems? Completely agree. Also: Lie about it and then claim you just don't understand when you're called out.

3

shadowrun456 t1_izdz98f wrote

ELI5 style explanation why Proof of Stake is inherently inferior to Proof of Work:

In a Proof of Work based system, it's impossible to permanently take 50%+ control of the network, as it's impossible to prevent new miners from joining the network, even if you have 50%+ of current mining power. In a Proof of Stake based system, it's inevitable that someone will permanently take 50%+ control of the network, as when someone buys up 50%+ of all existing coins, their stake will only get bigger and bigger, and it's impossible for anyone to ever overtake them.

As specifically regarding Bitcoin vs Ethereum:

Based partly on smart decisions and partly on luck, it came to be that there's no "leader" in the Bitcoin community. Satoshi Nakamoto left the project over 10 years ago. Satoshi's "successor" was Gavin Andresen, who, a few years later, managed to completely discredit himself in the eyes of the community and haven't been involved with Bitcoin since 2016.

Ethereum has a very clear leader - Vitalik Buterin. While Vitalik obviously doesn't have any direct control over Ethereum, his word is followed by the Ethereum's community as gospel. That would be bad enough in itself, even if Vitalik Buterin wasn't a Russian guy close to Vladimir Putin, which he is: https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2017/06/05/vladimir-putin-and-vitalik-buterin-discuss-ethereum-opportunities/

−1