Happy BTCirthday, Honey BTCadger! You Hungry little BTCastard!
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=233691.msg2471847#msg2471847

There is always a "Plan BTC":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqSz3iK-Oq0

Litecoin brings Light to our lives. You can't kill it, it's unstoppable!
Love & Light. Peace

Hmm, we might be approaching The Singularity sooner than we think:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHVtUw5wToA

Hopefully, a little bit of humor allows our brains to cool down and start thinking better

We need to replace Jews Media with the Juice Media, it's really that simple
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o66FUc61MvU

... unless governments themselves become BTC users, which they should.

It's a good question though. In the scenario of a single totalitarian world government PoW might not be the best option and instead a myriad of anonymous PoS coins will serve better. Though it would not be a perfect global money system for variety of reasons. This solution is temporary and so is the one world government. Once it falls apart PoW provides a neutral playground for competition.

We are far from the scenario described above, because there are clearly big countries who agreed to disagree. We need both systems as each serves its own purpose, so we will see how this plays out.

Implementing PoS in Bitcoin is indeed a SlipperySlope
Nothing is coincidental.

So the mass-debating continues


I wonder what happens if stakeholders hire a small group of miners and simply start checkpointing the blockchain they produce, even though it's not the longest one?


51% attacks is a cornerstone of PoW design.
If attack is not possible then the entity/mechanism preventing the attack becomes the central point of failure.

That's why we have an anarchy of competing governments.
Putting governments' spending onto blockchain would allow for greater transparency and accountability.
BTC blockchain might become the DNA of humanity, as a single healthy organism, that would evolve beyond the confines of a single planet.


I have rehashed most of my arguments up thread. Provided that this isn't the first time there is a discussion on the topic, there isn't much to add. I'm glad that debates have continued, though. Debates is what keeps us alive: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpMPu5p_QXU

By the way, you might notice some parallels in the video above and the movie I referred to earlier, so my concerns are not completely unfounded. PoW and PoS may and should co-exist and can even be friends

No, I'm just saying that trying to furk bicoin might result in bi-furk-action.
So, bi careful and don't furk it up!

You should watch Hunger Games, it's one heck of a movie, that's the asymptote I refer to.


That's why PoW provides a 51% mechanism.
It works both ways, any 51% attack can be 51% attacked.


You're probably saying that we've had a lot of fun here.
I don't know about you, but I'm mining the heck out of JoyCoin:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=905184.0

Energy cannot be wasted, just transformed.
Do you play computer games, do you watch tv, engage in sports maybe?

Do you realize how much energy humanity 'wastes' by simply existing?
Yeah, the whole Universe is just an utter waste of energy, this needs to stop, teh Big Crunch will save us

We might have a different definitions of improving.

Improvements in PoW come in a form of advancements in energy-efficient computation, new types of power sources and research of cryptographic hash functions. These improvements are tangible and can be applied to other areas of human life.

Improvements in PoS only benefit the few in power as any innovation will be privatized and used to further strengthen the control grid.


In BTC large coin holders need to decide what percentage of their wealth they will keep in coins and what they reinvest in mining so that competition for control keeps the system robust.

Investing the whole stake is risky as mining farms can burn or become obsolete as new tech emerges, so some balance need to be sought. This is what separates PoW from PoS. It is much more dynamic system without obvious asymptotes of power saturation. It is possible of course that PoS system stays robust and honest for a long time without spending any energy, but it's better to have alternatives where competition is more welcome. PoW provides that.

No one is forced to give any money to anyone, people exercise their own choices.
Competition requires energy, no-competition doesn't.

Of course not, everyone has a right to choose what they prefer, bicoin is cool, let's furk it!


So you equate PoS cryptocoins to dollars, which is correct as both have stakeholders at the center of their security model, while recognizing that PoW makes a difference, which I fully agree with.

Dollars, hmm... never heard of them, you mean $nakes?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r7wHMg5Yjg

By the way, we are talking about forking "bicoin" here.
Is it some form of hidden g@y propaganda? I'm straight, so I'm out

Debates is what keeps us alive
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpMPu5p_QXU

You're inserting judgement into equation.
PoW rules are neutral - run the algorithm faster and you win. Does that make you malicious?
It is like saying, countries can be attacked by other countries, thus countries are bad. Planets can be attacked by aliens - planets are wrong. Universes can collapse in a Big Crunch - universes are evil.

PoW 51% mechanism is what sets things in motion, PoS saturates towards centralization of power and stays there.


PoS security mechanism is that of a private enterprise. It works well when there are other enterprises to run to. Network effects work great with money, thus global money system is better served with PoW as it can stay robust all by itself by allowing competition for both money and control within the system.

51% mechanism is what allows to challenge the status quo, thus enabling competition for power.
Just sitting on your money in PoW does't give you control over the system, just engaging in the competition for control doesn't bring you money as mining is normally a break-even game. Thus money and control become orthogonal, which results in a dynamic system without asymptotes. In PoS you get both in a nice single package, which saturates fairly quickly.

Hybrid systems are more tricky beasts, thus they need to be studied closely. I'm concerned that saturation in PoS aspect of the hybrid will at some point begin to negatively influence the competition on PoW side.

They are suitable for different purposes.
You don't want a global money system to be a private enterprise owned by a wealthy few indefinitely.

Time might be better spent analyzing various properties and seeing it for yourself.