Feb 13 12:23 [raw]
There will be a number of proof-of-stake systems launching this year. I could say that they operate under a slightly different threat model than Bitcoin: they are "permissionless" in that anyone can spin up their own chain at any time and interoperate with other chains, but each chain is operated by what is effectively a cabal, which does not fit some people's definition of what "permissionless" and "decentralized" should mean... ...except the vicious cycle of proof-of-work has lead to the exact sort of cabal proponents of some platonic ideal of "decentralized" hope to prevent: it only takes two mining pools, either in collusion or through compromise, to pull of a so-called 51% attack against Bitcoin with the current miner distribution, and greater-than-99% of all Bitcoin transactions will be confirmed by less than a dozen mining pools. The experiment is a failure: proof-of-work does not work and is not a valid solution to the "decentralization" problem. Several chains operated by several cabals sounds like it does a better job of being "decentralized" than one chain operated by one cabal.
|Solidity||May 7 07:53||2|