I suspected from the Elon tweet that this could happen but didn't see a pattern until 24 hrs later. What y'all think?
Red Herring. PoS is more of the current status quo same ol same ol. More capital = more influence. PoW is the liberating tech. It has the most equitable & fair initial distribution. Much more fud to come.
More capital = more influence is the same for both PoS and PoW. With PoS more capital means you can buy more staking collateral. With PoW it means you can buy more hashrate. If Ethereum's PoS works as well as many of us think it will, it will be a devastating blow to any PoW chain. It's going to show that you can secure a network in a decentralized fashion without needlessly wasting energy on unnecessary calculations.
Valid perspective. Although I suspect eth2 with the required 32 eth to spin up a validator is gonna be hosted on a cloud service provider. Not as decentralized as the narrative presents. One could also consider the rise of meme tokens as a similar calculation bloat.
PoW/PoS have similar centralization issues. PoS = users can choose to run their validators on a cloud service rather than at home. PoW = Mining operations will concentrate where there is cheap energy. (e.g. we just saw a blackout in Xinjiang wipe out 50% of Bitcoins hashrate almost instantly). I'm not sure what you mean by meme token calculation bloat. PoS reduces the energy required by over 99%. That's because the power needed to process the actual tx is almost nothing compared to the power required to mine a block.
What do you mean suspect? Probably many will, but current recommendations from staking enthusiasts is for self-hosting for exactly this reason, since cloud interruptions will take many validators offline if they're too cloud reliant. I'm also leery of the narrative that PoS represents status quo (more money = more influence). There are many real-life scenarios where power and influence allow one to siphon more power at the expense of others, but with PoS, if incentives are not aligned with the network, malicious behavior by a large stakeholder would hurt themselves the most, no? I am very open to the idea that large stakeholders could somehow scheme a way to make it happen, but I've yet seen it framed. It wouldn't make sense to stake in something in such a way as to destroy demand.
Your perspective is accurate. I think we are heading into a blockchain agnostic future where ‘and/also’ has more currency than ‘either/or.’ Satoshi’s vision spawned an entire ecosystem that have inter-dependencies. I think the whole space would do better without the tribal in-fighting and focus on the task at hand - creating sound hard money that does not erode one’s accumulated lifetime’s worth of productivity. As for meme bloat, eth fees have consistently sky-rocketed when the network gets congested with the latest meme token mooning. Various Dog & Moon tokens being the most recent. With the design of ETH2 that congestion will just be located on a shard/rollup vs layer1. I’m both a BTC ETH bull and enjoy trading the pair.
I'd even argue that there is far more disincentive to attack a PoS network than a PoW. With PoW, with enough money I can rent hashrate and attempt to attack the network. I'd only be out the cost to rent the hashrate for a short period of time. On a PoS network you have to put up a lot more collateral to achieve the same effect and risk having the entire amount slashed if you attack the network. The equivalent for PoW would be if you had to buy all of the mining equipment yourself to perform the attack, and then when you attack the network all of your mining equipment blows up and becomes worthless.
Bitcoin and Ethereum are solving a different set of problems and can coexist and thrive. The tribalism among the followers are causing division and hinders progress Bitcoin is the most secure blockchain. Its purpose is one thing which is to be the hardest money in existence As such, bitcoin is not designed to store too much on its blockchain and this is to allow anyone to run a full node with relative ease even on raspberry pi with only 400GB of space needed No one can rent mining to even come close to 51% attack the bitcoin blockchain (currently). Poolin at 19% of the network hashrate has over 675,000 active miners. Those miners are outside miners, I would not be surprised if more than 50% of those miners are in the US & Europe I tried running a full node of Ethereum once, and I failed. I did not have the available space requirement. I think there's pruned version of the blockchain, which kind of defeats the purpose of running a full node and knowing all history since genesis block I stopped trying as the most important thing for me to run a node is to run a wallet. Got all confused with a node and wallet situation on Ethereum. On Bitcoin, I can run a command line wallet, bam, in 5 minutes I was all-in on Tezos at one time. It's a PoS from the very start. There are issues with PoS some of which is the lockup required. Tezos solves this through LPOS, Liquid Proof of Stake. There's also the delegation of stake that needs to be addressed, Decred has this, but this leads to centralization. The popular ones at the start continue to be the big one Tezos again solves this by having the rewards to be equal in frequency whether you delegate to a big POS staker or to a small one. Still, people tend to set and forget, so Coinbase becomes the winner, which if there's an upgrade/update, and a big staker (called baker in Tezos) has issues, could cause delay in block generation/validation I have no Tezos anymore so I'm not shilling it, but these are the advances in PoS that need to be in Eth 2.0. Liquidity, delegation and prevention of centralization and address updates and upgrades for everyone to be in synch Those things are not present in PoW bitcoin network. It does one thing and does it best, which is to have the most secure blockchain Ethereum is the great. The whole growth of defi and smart contract is because of Ethereum. Unless DOT or SOL or any of the competitors unseat Ethereum, I fully support the success of Ethereum
I'm not interested in getting into a huge PoS vs. PoW debate. My post was just saying that all other things being equal, it's more expensive to attack a true PoS network with slashing than PoW and hash renting, by probably 1 or 2 orders of magnitude higher. I don't hate PoW because it got us to where we are at but I do think it's going to become an antiquated means to secure a blockchain. That's just my opinion. Time will tell.