>The paper you referenced from early 2014 isn't really considered very relevant anymore It is relevant and discusses fundamental problem...
>The paper you referenced from early 2014 isn't really considered very relevant anymore It is relevant and discusses fundamental problems with PoS, it is a very strongly reasoned paper and there hasn't been anything reasonable countering it so far. It isn't considered relevant to scamcoiners, of course, since their goal isn't making a secure cryptocurrency, rather transferring money from a fools hand to theirs. >t's kind of hard to have an argument of this subject with you, given that you seem to be complaining about PoS when ethereum 1.0 will be a 100% PoW system So because I complain about PoS, I cannot argue that software is broken for any other reason? I don't have a specific complaint, they have such a complicated system that I have a myriad of complaints including Ethereums multiple consensus implementations, ASIC resistance, incredibly small block times, using insecure crypto in their illegal IPO, their system being basically useless, etc. >The PoW guys will keep complaining that the PoS systems "aren't secure enough" and the PoS guys will happily use them anyway. Since "PoS guys" appear to be fine with centralization and the obvious harmed security from that, they probably will be happy with other forms of broken security. >Clearly I'm a PoS fan and don't think that'll happen. There is basically no debate among cryptocurrency researchers that PoS doesn't work, it is mostly promoted among noobies and scammers. You can be a "fan" of it all you want, but it isn't like being a fan of Republicans or a fan of C++, it's like being a fan of md4 for cryptography.
Posted by lappa on Feb 16, 2015, 3:52 AM
Tags
Related issues
- You obviously did this for fun, I don’t want to throw any shade on it and have no criticism, I also make fun things just because.¹ So ta...
- Many devs love to shit on the guy from the 'I just want the exe.
- Now imagine how poor people stress if their smartphone bricks or gets damaged or lost.
- Resuming an extended-thinking session fails permanently with 400 "thinking blocks cannot be modified" (transcript stores thinking text as empty but keeps signat
- I'll preface this with a statement that as a European I want European alternatives to succeed, and MS-owned GitHub to shrivel and disappear.
- Yeah, but there’s a world of difference between “not perfect” and “we rounded a few sliders, and now the modal is a nightmare to use”.
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.8,000 issues0 comments
reliability (SaaS)
You obviously did this for fun, I don’t want to throw any shade on it and have no criticism, I also make fun things just because.¹ So ta...
Many devs love to shit on the guy from the 'I just want the exe.
Now imagine how poor people stress if their smartphone bricks or gets damaged or lost.
Resuming an extended-thinking session fails permanently with 400 "thinking blocks cannot be modified" (transcript stores thinking text as empty but keeps signat
I'll preface this with a statement that as a European I want European alternatives to succeed, and MS-owned GitHub to shrivel and disappear.
Yeah, but there’s a world of difference between “not perfect” and “we rounded a few sliders, and now the modal is a nightmare to use”.
I used to write a lot of native Windows corporate software in the 90's and 2000's and my standard login window was a floating draggable o...
App broken with Mosquitto broker 7.0.0
>The paper you referenced from early 2014 isn't really considered very relevant anymore It is relevant and discusses fundamental problem...
>The paper you referenced from early 2014 isn't really considered very relevant anymore It is relevant and discusses fundamental problems with PoS, it is a very strongly reasoned paper and there hasn't been anything reasonable countering it so far. It isn't considered relevant to scamcoiners, of course, since their goal isn't making a secure cryptocurrency, rather transferring money from a fools hand to theirs. >t's kind of hard to have an argument of this subject with you, given that you seem to be complaining about PoS when ethereum 1.0 will be a 100% PoW system So because I complain about PoS, I cannot argue that software is broken for any other reason? I don't have a specific complaint, they have such a complicated system that I have a myriad of complaints including Ethereums multiple consensus implementations, ASIC resistance, incredibly small block times, using insecure crypto in their illegal IPO, their system being basically useless, etc. >The PoW guys will keep complaining that the PoS systems "aren't secure enough" and the PoS guys will happily use them anyway. Since "PoS guys" appear to be fine with centralization and the obvious harmed security from that, they probably will be happy with other forms of broken security. >Clearly I'm a PoS fan and don't think that'll happen. There is basically no debate among cryptocurrency researchers that PoS doesn't work, it is mostly promoted among noobies and scammers. You can be a "fan" of it all you want, but it isn't like being a fan of Republicans or a fan of C++, it's like being a fan of md4 for cryptography.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.