BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: CLains on November 25, 2014, 03:31:01 pm
-
"Proof of stake continues to be one of the most controversial discussions in the cryptocurrency space. Although the idea has many undeniable benefits, including efficiency, a larger security margin and future-proof immunity to hardware centralization concerns, proof of stake algorithms tend to be substantially more complex than proof of work-based alternatives, and there is a large amount of skepticism that proof of stake can work at all, particularly with regard to the supposedly fundamental “nothing at stake” problem. As it turns out, however, the problems are solvable, and one can make a rigorous argument that proof of stake, with all its benefits, can be made to be successful – but at a moderate cost. The purpose of this post will be to explain exactly what this cost is, and how its impact can be minimized."
https://blog.ethereum.org/2014/11/25/proof-stake-learned-love-weak-subjectivity/
-
Needs a tl;dr synopsis.
-
I have a feeling that people don't like BitShares because they mix up POS with DPOS and don't know that the drawbacks of POS do not hold for DPOS ..
Good to see a healthy discussion over @ethereum
-
I have a feeling that people don't like BitShares because they mix up POS with DPOS and don't know that the drawbacks of POS do not hold for DPOS ..
Good to see a healthy discussion over @ethereum
+5% That's exactly it.
-
Needs a tl;dr synopsis.
I was hoping for that as well, and maybe a comment as well.
We got a few here who know how to cut through to the core in plain English. ;)
-
At the core the article simply says that technology is merely a tool and that true consensus is formed outside the technology based upon social networks.
Hence what I have been saying about BTS and how it is immune to hostile take overs because consensus will be obvious outside the network.