Njaa t1_izba0mb wrote
Reply to comment by feelings_arent_facts 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
Sure, but that's an aspect of their culture, not their tech.
When people say "the basic elements of bitcoin or crypto in general", I would expect that to cover technical aspects, not just what the hivemind is currently thinking.
feelings_arent_facts t1_ize8jrl wrote
Well that's why they won't switch. You can build any system you want. You need consensus of the users in a decentralized system.
Njaa t1_izebmp9 wrote
Yes, we agree on this point - but that's a different claim than what the original commenter was making:
>Bitcoin is not going to go PoS and anyone that actually thinks it will - or even can - doesn’t understand the most basic elements of bitcoin or crypto in general
shadowrun456 t1_izdzfqt 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/
Njaa t1_izebbhq wrote
These are all arguments for why you think it's a bad idea, not arguments for why it couldn't be done.
Also, considering how critical Vitalik has been towards Russia's imperialism - to the point where he openly laments not being able to return to the country until after a regime change - I question the sincerity of your attempt to paint him as some sort of agent for Putin.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments