You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Energy Expenditure: Bitcoin vs. Banking System ⚡

in LeoFinance2 years ago

The massive hardware investment and power consumption is the source of network security.
PoS can never be as secure.

See my detailed post on this from almost 3 years ago (one of my first posts on this blockchain).

https://peakd.com/crypto/@apshamilton/analysis-of-51-attack-by-nation-state-vulnerability-of-pow-vs-pos

https://peakd.com/crypto/@apshamilton/51-attack-by-nation-state-pow-vs-pos-debate-with-founder-of-eth-etc-ada-coins-and-iohk-company

Sort:  

Thx for the input, yes PoW has some advantages over PoS and that its security model relies not only on money, but also hardware and energy. Also the distribution of new coins could be seen more fair, as it does not depend on prior stake. However, if Ethereum proves that a system can be successfully transitioned to PoS, PoS could at least become an option for Bitcoin in the long run.

Bitcoin devs are weary about making big changes on the protocol level to BTC. Any such fork would become an "altcoin", as did the upgrade to larger blocks.

Bitcoin devs are very conservative for a reason, but that does not mean that no changes to the protocol level could be done, more important is that there is consensus for the change, then it can be done, like increasing the block size with the SegWit soft fork upgrade.