''...computational resource monopoly that I'm aware of but in Proof of Stake there are ways.'' - are you? Please explain these ways.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
''...computational resource monopoly that I'm aware of but in Proof of Stake there are ways.'' - are you? Please explain these ways.
In Proof of Stake you can choose your witnesses which is equivalent to choosing your miners in Proof of Work. It can be a political choice like an election or random.
Additional expenses. Voting / choice must be informed - informing takes time and other resources and is prone to disinformation attack. The more you explain it to me, the more it looks like the present day corporate governance model - but digitized in fancy 'crypto' cover.
On political versions of Proof of Stake like DPOS for example I do agree this is a bottleneck. This in my opinion is the main bottleneck. But I also must note that not every version of Proof of Stake requires politics or political selection of witnesses. The process can be done randomly (such as algorand, or it can be done in the masternode way where people buy the masternodes.
Again, shareholder style governance is one of the better forms that exist for humans so to say it resembles that is in my opinion not a bad thing. It's better than communism, monarchy, etc. The people with the most to lose have the most to gain and done right the people who interact with the platform earn the stakes (like with Steem if Steem worked as intended).
You assume that voting and randomness have no cost? Human voting and delegation to vote, i.e. human attention is for free? Opinion costs! Randomization cheaper than hashing?