The "mining" paradigm just ends up a ridiculous, planet-destroying Red Queen's Race - arbitrary "difficulty" shifts mean literal power plants are being stuffed full of computing hardware to serve the exact same purpose of a handful of personal desktops back in 2013. At what point can we finally, finally say "this is absolutely fucking ridiculous and completely unnecessary" and abolish the whole contrivance?
"Proof of stake" is obviously less directly immediately awful than that, but it takes "the rich get richer" and literally bakes it into the commerce system itself. I mean, it's better than Shitcoin wasting terawatts of energy finding magic numbers with a bunch of 0's and centralizing the whole transaction system around the whims of a handful of Chinese and American mega-miners, but still, it's a continuous bank bailout that gets stronger the less the banks actually need it.
No, proof of stake is obviously more awful. Let's take literally every problem we have, all of which stem from enormous income inequality which has rarely been equalled, if ever, in history, and make it progressively worse as fast as we can,
Poorfags getting taxed fees for every transaction while richfags earn the fees. Poorfags getting some of their money inflated away over time while richfags earn interest. I fail to see how it makes much difference.
Under the current system, inflation is not designed into the system. It exists, and it's an arguably unavoidable part of the system, yes, but in the end it's a byproduct.
With Proof-of-Stake, it's baked in.
For an analogous hypothetical situation that might help illustrate why I find it unpleasant even if it's functionally the exact same as how things currently are (and just so we're clear, I completely concede that point!):
Cigarettes cause cancer and lung disease. They also give you a bit of a buzz and make
Interest is happenstance. Fees are deliberately designed.
The computer you're on is the byproduct of what I, at my most charitable, would consider to be substandard working conditions. I wouldn't hold you personally responsible for that (unless you really got up my nose). But if you were designing a new way to build computers with nothing but dirt and pixie dust and decided "okay, and let's lock a few dozen poor Chinese people in a noisy poorly-ventilated room and have some African guys digging and undigging
Oh, I agree 100%! I'm not saying PoS is worse than PoW, maybe that's where we're crossed up - I agree that Shitcoin's PoW is no good either.
I thought we were talking about Proof-of-Stake versus the current non-coin financial system where financial institutions charge higher interest for individuals borrowing money than they pay in return to individuals who deposit their money with said institutions. The way things currently stand, the rich have access to greater money-making opportunities than the not-rich,
The amount of bitcoin that gets mined with every transaction gets cut in half every every four years, until eventually the last bitcoin will have been mined, and mining will happen no more. This is by design.
Bitcoin isn't mined with every transaction. Transactions are components of blocks, and when those are created, new Bitcoins (I refuse to use the singular-plural, it sounds dumb as hell) are spawned. The amount of Bitcoins spawned with each new block has decreased over time, but the difficulty of creating new blocks has increased - by design - so that every x minutes, one new block is created, no matter how much processing power is being thrown at the calculation
There has to be another alternative... right? (Score:4, Insightful)
The "mining" paradigm just ends up a ridiculous, planet-destroying Red Queen's Race - arbitrary "difficulty" shifts mean literal power plants are being stuffed full of computing hardware to serve the exact same purpose of a handful of personal desktops back in 2013. At what point can we finally, finally say "this is absolutely fucking ridiculous and completely unnecessary" and abolish the whole contrivance?
"Proof of stake" is obviously less directly immediately awful than that, but it takes "the rich get richer" and literally bakes it into the commerce system itself. I mean, it's better than Shitcoin wasting terawatts of energy finding magic numbers with a bunch of 0's and centralizing the whole transaction system around the whims of a handful of Chinese and American mega-miners, but still, it's a continuous bank bailout that gets stronger the less the banks actually need it.
There has to be a better way, no?
Re: (Score:1)
No, proof of stake is obviously more awful. Let's take literally every problem we have, all of which stem from enormous income inequality which has rarely been equalled, if ever, in history, and make it progressively worse as fast as we can,
Re: (Score:2)
Poorfags getting taxed fees for every transaction while richfags earn the fees. Poorfags getting some of their money inflated away over time while richfags earn interest. I fail to see how it makes much difference.
Re: (Score:1)
Under the current system, inflation is not designed into the system. It exists, and it's an arguably unavoidable part of the system, yes, but in the end it's a byproduct.
With Proof-of-Stake, it's baked in.
For an analogous hypothetical situation that might help illustrate why I find it unpleasant even if it's functionally the exact same as how things currently are (and just so we're clear, I completely concede that point!):
Cigarettes cause cancer and lung disease. They also give you a bit of a buzz and make
Re: (Score:2)
Fees or interest, I still fail to see how it would make much of a difference. Either way, money flows from poorfags to richfags.
Re: (Score:1)
Interest is happenstance. Fees are deliberately designed.
The computer you're on is the byproduct of what I, at my most charitable, would consider to be substandard working conditions. I wouldn't hold you personally responsible for that (unless you really got up my nose). But if you were designing a new way to build computers with nothing but dirt and pixie dust and decided "okay, and let's lock a few dozen poor Chinese people in a noisy poorly-ventilated room and have some African guys digging and undigging
Re: (Score:2)
The PoS interest is deliberately designed, the PoW fees are deliberately designed ... and they are both regressive.
Re: (Score:1)
Oh, I agree 100%! I'm not saying PoS is worse than PoW, maybe that's where we're crossed up - I agree that Shitcoin's PoW is no good either.
I thought we were talking about Proof-of-Stake versus the current non-coin financial system where financial institutions charge higher interest for individuals borrowing money than they pay in return to individuals who deposit their money with said institutions. The way things currently stand, the rich have access to greater money-making opportunities than the not-rich,
Re: (Score:2)
Proof of Stake allows staking pools. Anyone can get in.
Re: (Score:1)
The amount of bitcoin that gets mined with every transaction gets cut in half every every four years, until eventually the last bitcoin will have been mined, and mining will happen no more. This is by design.
Re: (Score:2)
What? No, I think you have some wires crossed.
Bitcoin isn't mined with every transaction. Transactions are components of blocks, and when those are created, new Bitcoins (I refuse to use the singular-plural, it sounds dumb as hell) are spawned. The amount of Bitcoins spawned with each new block has decreased over time, but the difficulty of creating new blocks has increased - by design - so that every x minutes, one new block is created, no matter how much processing power is being thrown at the calculation
Re: (Score:2)
What does Proof of Stake have to do with banks? Any idiot with a few hundred bucks can join a staking pool.