Quote from: Phu Juck on April 14, 2024, 02:20:23 PM

PoW vs. PoS should be an important topic, when reviewing a coin.

Pro and Contra Pos vs. PoW

Quite contrary to PoS, PoW is very hard or almost impossible to compromise. Not so for PoS, where more attack vectors can be found.

POW despite how it has been proven to be very secure doesn't mean it applies to all coins.
Bitcoin isn't the only coin that uses POW, there are others but unlike Bitcoin they don't enjoy higher hashrate.
BCH is a POW, copy cat of Bitcoin hoping for improvement but sacrificed security for speed.
POS is centralized so not a fan but we should be aware than a coin using the consensus POW doesn't make it better.
This two consensus are popular for a permissionless blockchain and not a permissioned one which has IBFT and PBFT as their face.

Quote from: Kruw on April 14, 2024, 08:20:34 PM

Quote from: philipma1957 on April 14, 2024, 02:28:54 PM

POW has attack vectors.

clogging the mempools with ordinals and hashrate manipulation is being done as I type.

I am a fan of POW not pos but POW has flaws.

POS is simply a terrible idea 💡.

Quote from: Phu Juck on April 14, 2024, 02:36:47 PM

You are right, ordinals spam has proven to be a big issue for Bitcoin and tx fees were very high when it ordinals was very famous.
I hope it will stay like right now because transaction fees are back to normal.

Ordinals has nothing to do with the consensus system a blockchain uses.

Quote from: 1miau on April 14, 2024, 02:42:19 PM

For such crap like ordinals, inscriptions and similar baggage I'm really grateful for shitcoins to exist. Having such a mess on Solana or Ethereum is a big benefit for Bitcoin to stay as far away as possible from getting overloaded by such spammy activities.
And no, I'm not a friend of Shitcoins but here, no one can deny that shitcoins are not beneficial by absorbing a large part of spam. Wink

You have this backwards. It's beneficial for ordinals and inscriptions to take place on Bitcoin instead of other chains because these transactions pay fees for higher hashrate security.

Yes I won't deny the increase in security but like in economics I believe the opportunity cost is too high.
Is like sacrificing a head to get a complete body armor not just an helmet.
I believe there should be balance and shitcoins are helping with that
The hashrate Now doesn't have to be exaggerated we can't sacrifice applicability for full security.
Whats the essence of owning an asset if it becomes too illiquid.