Etiquetado: 16
- Este debate tiene 0 respuestas, 1 mensaje y ha sido actualizado por última vez el hace 1 año por boycecoward267.
-
AutorEntradas
-
28 octubre, 2023 a las 1:21 am #20545boycecoward267Participante
<br> Things in the non-bitcoin economy take a hell of a lot longer to get done than in Bitcoin land; people were complaining about why GLBSE wasn’t able to give them their bitcoin back right away (and started freaking out on the forums, in a large part thanks to theymos), really things don’t move that quickly offline. At that time, Bitcoin was not worth a lot. The failure of SegWit2x, a movement supported by most of the large exchanges and custodians at the time, demonstrates this. At this point, exchanges would simply become deputized – just as banks are today – into carrying out state policy, which could well extend to controlling public blockchains at the protocol layer. In a PoS-dominant world, exchange operators, custodians and banks that accumulate the most coins are king. So, the exchange CEOs that lionize purportedly ecological PoS and dismiss click through the up coming document merits of PoW should be careful what they wish for. But we would argue that even though the naive analysis suggests that exchanges should, as a group, support and foster the growth of PoS while marginalizing PoW, this is unwise in the long run. Users that deposit coins generally surrender their coin-based network voting rights to the exchanges themselves.<br>
<br> At that point, accumulating voting power proportional to coins held becomes a poisoned chalice. Democracy Earth and its peers aim to prevent corruption by decentralizing the voting process, subjecting each decision and vote to the public review of a blockchain. 40:56 Trevor Burrus: We have all these other cryptocurrencies which we brushed on a little bit, and there are a lot, and Ethereum is probably the most well-known outside of Bitcoin, but many of them market themselves as different things or doing a different thing, or adding a different, of course, flavor to crypto and to the blockchain in general, some of them for computing applications and things like this. The blockchain bills are designed to make Malta a hotspot for blockchain and cryptocurrency companies. Public blockchains exist to eliminate centralized points of control and to remove the political constraints that are inherent in traditional finance. It may seem appealing on a surface level to control consensus from the seat of a large custodial exchange, but it is a power that is best spurned in the first place.<br>
<br> It could do so, moreover, without breaking any of the existing consensus rules – including the block size limit. The purpose of a stop-loss order is mainly to limit losses. Unless you are eager to be deputized into a hall monitor for the new financial system, it is best to repudiate the influence that helming a PoS network would grant you. PoS networks explicitly grant control and discretion to the largest stakeholders, so at this point, the jig would be up. Imagine a similar movement today, except taking place on one of the larger PoS networks. While FTX’s analysis is off base on the question of fees and PoW, we can nevertheless sympathize with the desire of an exchange operator to align itself with proof-of-stake networks, and to minimize the importance of PoW networks. And then there’s also a question about when do we jump? Then bitcoin cash came alon<br>p><br>p> It would be convenient in the extreme if a small handful of exchanges accumulated a large portion of supply in PoS networks, and then submitted (as they ultimately must and will) to increasingly onerous regulation. These exchanges voted with user funds in Sun’s favor, demonstrating an obvious principal-agent problem created by the custody of PoS assets. The combination of PoS and large quantities of coins held in regulated exchanges or banks is one that is very conducive to the state reasserting control over these nominally-decentralized systems. SWIFT, to a world of stablecoins, MetaMasks and Layer 2 protocols, the state will have to develop new ways to control financial flows. Many of the early developers didn’t have extra money to buy coins; they were still in school, or were pouring all of their money into a startup. Ethereum is a bit more complex and computationally intense than Bitcoin, but still far more limited than Solana in terms of the computational work validators must do to maintain the ledger. Solana validators must therefore manage two orders of magnitude more data than Bitcoin validat<br> -
AutorEntradas
- Debes estar registrado para responder a este debate.