path: root/81/3582fc271d375d928b59af8be2a3ad10222bf5

Return-Path: <willtech@live.com.au>
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::137])
 by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34ABAC0001
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Mon, 10 May 2021 21:22:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ABD040534
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Mon, 10 May 2021 21:22:37 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001,
 SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id nDcp9aiX_Q1W
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Mon, 10 May 2021 21:22:34 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from APC01-HK2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com
 (mail-hk2apc01olkn0824.outbound.protection.outlook.com
 [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:febc::824])
 by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3AC1A404C7
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Mon, 10 May 2021 21:22:34 +0000 (UTC)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none;
 b=lUkKzJ28RzkfGo+NqYBKZI+MuWAC67oFUGdirwwMMJsHQu0HDQVNoMmSa4x6LYnQFgII9kuMRLdLl+ZAyUDI4cTfTBsNi5+bNooDFKYG8s/TbsFzrgfQgAPC6+OWy00yEKvPIZ/UGshEoRW/8y4YyF14L60am2E3kvOASr56sz28EDAWk5Fq+twEC9J4hiGgCQHUR60Q605U8PDF40MAZ4oYqaDCtys/OSxMXrYk4OkIDG0a//DaXdbEAoyKnH9wTb0i1U/7v+G//TtC58r7Y7+KgHBZbtDeWt7yxLwgW5nSdxOiNXUkVj7btyCXo1eoLXYj7wjZKXOD8qbVK0mwaA==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; 
 s=arcselector9901;
 h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck;
 bh=zPHszvzNs6F2nEpeXsIGyhHCSDZp/jE/aykKmakyg4w=;
 b=Zlk8fi4fJSTvsxCLPuuOF3E4qslekL4LAg3iW7sm5PGB/n/Yb0cY5I1mB3kbHTTjIkuc0TUyHd2NdcfwcxFNttCOZ2f/foafyauItt3eiLlBCYci9eDqWd6kdzg9vfvsxacJMtXvoGhtnFqQIArZk0wGt6N9ivYA5v21cr4TLKOZswWzMBfFGc2+xmoP8/oHV0P2zDyMEsetckHUByG8qkA35GRBVU6xzod6nb+DBJ1Z7al8WJ0NEk8xvw5V4CIKEK3rE0AW1fE9sQUReHKNnnyw0eDX3B+YeTlb0AyyzGzhQtVhzbVSoW6OpcMtj1+WDhYXgKfrlip+9VR3sk6Cdw==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=none; dmarc=none;
 dkim=none; arc=none
Received: from PS2PR06CA0023.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com (2603:1096:300:56::35)
 by TY2PR0101MB3038.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com
 (2603:1096:404:9e::16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2,
 cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.4108.30; Mon, 10 May
 2021 21:22:17 +0000
Received: from HK2APC01FT055.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com
 (2603:1096:300:56:cafe::28) by PS2PR06CA0023.outlook.office365.com
 (2603:1096:300:56::35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2,
 cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.4108.25 via Frontend
 Transport; Mon, 10 May 2021 21:22:17 +0000
Received: from PS2P216MB1089.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2a01:111:e400:7ebc::43)
 by HK2APC01FT055.mail.protection.outlook.com
 (2a01:111:e400:7ebc::304) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2,
 cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.4108.25 via Frontend
 Transport; Mon, 10 May 2021 21:22:17 +0000
Received: from PS2P216MB1089.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
 ([fe80::3c57:80af:9d68:d8b8]) by PS2P216MB1089.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
 ([fe80::3c57:80af:9d68:d8b8%7]) with mapi id 15.20.4108.032; Mon, 10 May 2021
 21:22:17 +0000
From: LORD HIS EXCELLENCY JAMES HRMH <willtech@live.com.au>
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>, Erik
 Aronesty <erik@q32.com>, Keagan McClelland <keagan.mcclelland@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [bitcoin-dev] Opinion on proof of stake in future
Thread-Index: AQHXQ5NUprfDxc6ILEKTyCaQIF2FF6rcxK4AgAAOxICAAGYxEQ==
Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 21:22:17 +0000
Message-ID: <PS2P216MB10897B23359226ADA4859AE89D549@PS2P216MB1089.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
References: <6do5xN2g5LPnFeM55iJ-4C4MyXOu_KeXxy68Xt4dJQMhi3LJ8ZrLICmEUlh8JGfDmsDG12m1JDAh0e0huwK_MlyKpdfn22ru3zsm7lYLfBo=@protonmail.com>
 <CAJowKg+QM94g+JcC-E-NGD4J9-nXHWt5kBw14bXTAWaqZz=bYw@mail.gmail.com>,
 <CALeFGL02d9NVp+yobrtc2g6k2nBjBj0Qb==3Ukkbi8C_zb5qMg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALeFGL02d9NVp+yobrtc2g6k2nBjBj0Qb==3Ukkbi8C_zb5qMg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-AU, en-US
Content-Language: en-AU
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-incomingtopheadermarker: OriginalChecksum:FD631E5A8E9DAEDD823E1AEF1A1DEA609A2794AEDDC413930A3AF47A4E2DAE0F;
 UpperCasedChecksum:403FF5CC57B7AD1F1A895BF98D75BE492916DB207F0B41BB576517C212DA9237;
 SizeAsReceived:7248; Count:45
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-tmn: [7Ay1Zddc9l8dyCKJk67g1YbKxdS4C4rI]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-incomingheadercount: 45
x-eopattributedmessage: 0
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: d18a452c-5174-4581-f4ce-08d913f9b02f
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: TY2PR0101MB3038:
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: uMfEw7pVe6yFAz9SsIhaU2B3MevkHnOEzqAyECv3vsUGUeDlL6lnbAaC36PLhkPsXnOsd7Ausqhtakc1/GeDNE7j5tZcxM+/eKXAu7vWjWqZF7gHI53Vb89Oo6MnYBfPBsuBpUuDXANSnCK4HkxH46zCCn4VtRsFCXYt7VB94C+caik5sXtUjhfD8MlbhOCpMJidChfQzCQL2UKQ9QVEIJYdNDh6QL3uCJv9Xvj3jsN8+bCpwPMSw4F6TGZ4xFA6EQSCvbLtm+cbDpy9uQ2ZzydGpCubs5cGnHwYpZUz2TzfssKxHnw/XwZoSGVKQFfMkMtWYK8wqjPdN8ne9zCSyX+F5AHXxlFV4GrjBL08JLxUEXxkXv8h31hfIavoBaqmZjiqDsbG3SfBnjMVS8hKXoFFkfdd78JFGogG8E4oRbzABBq4Aq4rEMNPVqybpOI2ctEren64qyO9gpQjVPmtzQZr9A7m6+Fh/o5EGFAFQcU=
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: wdDioiLGM4teob3yj3C7TBdDzFPz5aeOaD8pdOwuFr+AGEkNFbXmNvZJogxi5AQc/bwCuZa/YLTebeWPvxAI7E/2pDgF4DMiz75Mu6hL6axD1B4w/qdU2NC+brFx4fF/x4J7p91T59G+a7CZBO2D4Q==
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="_000_PS2P216MB10897B23359226ADA4859AE89D549PS2P216MB1089KORP_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: sct-15-20-3174-20-msonline-outlook-5c337.templateTenant
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: HK2APC01FT055.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-RMS-PersistedConsumerOrg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: d18a452c-5174-4581-f4ce-08d913f9b02f
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 10 May 2021 21:22:17.2870 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-rms-persistedconsumerorg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: TY2PR0101MB3038
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 10 May 2021 22:21:36 +0000
Cc: SatoshiSingh <SatoshiSingh@protonmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Opinion on proof of stake in future
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, 
 <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, 
 <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 21:22:37 -0000

--_000_PS2P216MB10897B23359226ADA4859AE89D549PS2P216MB1089KORP_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Good Afternoon,

Proof-of-stake sounds like an altcoin fork. There is no consideration that =
proof-of-work is insufficient or that it can be improved upon, only that it=
 should be regulated. Imagine, you are a gold miner with larger hands so yo=
u start a mining race and mine plenty more than everyone. Pretty soon every=
body is employing all their available resources just to keep up in the mini=
ng race since there are only so many carts instead of just to leisurely uti=
lise surplus resources for an opportune find. Each block is a new gold mine=
. It is enough for everybody to use leisurely resources.

I have initiated conversation previously regarding a method to regulate min=
ing, and believe whole heartedly it should happen. That is necessary for th=
e future stability of Bitcoin as it is clear the rate of work cannot be all=
owed to increase at such a rate. If you search the bitcoin-dev archives you=
 will find discussion there under my email as we search for a solution.

KING JAMES HRMH
Great British Empire

Regards,
The Australian
LORD HIS EXCELLENCY JAMES HRMH (& HMRH)
of Hougun Manor & Glencoe & British Empire
MR. Damian A. James Williamson
Wills

et al.


Willtech
www.willtech.com.au
www.go-overt.com
and other projects

earn.com/willtech
linkedin.com/in/damianwilliamson


m. 0487135719
f. +61261470192


This email does not constitute a general advice. Please disregard this emai=
l if misdelivered.
________________________________
From: bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev-bounces@lists.linuxfoundation.org> on behalf=
 of Keagan McClelland via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.or=
g>
Sent: Tuesday, 11 May 2021 1:01 AM
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Er=
ik Aronesty <erik@q32.com>
Cc: SatoshiSingh <SatoshiSingh@protonmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Opinion on proof of stake in future

To reiterate some of the points here. My problem with proof of stake is two=
fold.

1. It requires permission of coin holders to enter into the system. This is=
 not true of proof of work. You may even attempt (though not successfully) =
a proof of work with pencil and paper and submit the block from a regular l=
aptop if you so choose. Whether this level of permissionlessness is necessa=
ry is up to individual risk tolerance etc. but it is definitely the default=
 preference of Bitcoin.

2. Proof of stake must have a trusted means of timestamping to regulate ove=
rproduction of blocks. This introduction of trust is generally considered t=
o be a nonstarter in Bitcoin. Proof of Work regulates this by making blocks=
 fundamentally difficult to produce in the first place.

Like Jeremy, I=92m always interested to learn about new attempts in consens=
us algorithms, but the bar to clear is very high and proof of stake to date=
 has not proposed much less demonstrated a set of properties that is consis=
tent with Bitcoins objectives.

Keagan

On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 8:43 AM Erik Aronesty via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@=
lists.linuxfoundation.org<mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>> wr=
ote:
personally, not speaking for anyone else, i think that proof-of-burn
has a much higher likelihood of being a) good enough security and b)
solving the nothing-at-stake problem

 the only issue i see with a quality PoB implementation is a robust
solution to the block-timing problem.

https://grisha.org/blog/2018/01/23/explaining-proof-of-work/

i do think there *could* be other low-energy solutions to verifiable
timing, just haven't seen one


On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 6:50 PM SatoshiSingh via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org<mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfounda=
tion.org>> wrote:
>
> Hello list,
>
> I am a lurker here and like many of you I worry about the energy usage of=
 bitcoin mining. I understand a lot mining happens with renewable resources=
 but the impact is still high.
>
> I want to get your opinion on implementing proof of stake for bitcoin min=
ing in future. For now, proof of stake is still untested and not battle tes=
ted like proof of work. Though someday it will be.
>
> In the following years we'll be seeing proof of stake being implemented. =
Smaller networks can test PoS which is a luxury bitcoin can't afford. Here'=
s how I see this the possibilities:
>
> 1 - Proof of stake isn't a good enough security mechanism
> 2 - Proof of state is a good security mechanism and works as intended
>
> IF PoS turns out to be good after battle testing, would you consider impl=
ementing it for Bitcoin? I understand this would invoke a lot of controvers=
ies and a hard fork that no one likes. But its important enough to consider=
 a hard fork. What are your opinions provided PoS does work?
>
> Love from India.
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org<mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfound=
ation.org>
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org<mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundat=
ion.org>
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev

--_000_PS2P216MB10897B23359226ADA4859AE89D549PS2P216MB1089KORP_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3DWindows-1=
252">
<style type=3D"text/css" style=3D"display:none;"> P {margin-top:0;margin-bo=
ttom:0;} </style>
</head>
<body dir=3D"ltr">
<div style=3D"font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;=
 color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
Good Afternoon,</div>
<div style=3D"font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;=
 color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div style=3D"font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;=
 color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
Proof-of-stake sounds like an altcoin fork. There is no consideration that =
proof-of-work is insufficient or that it can be improved upon, only that it=
 should be regulated. Imagine, you are a gold miner with larger hands so yo=
u start a mining race and mine plenty
 more than everyone. Pretty soon everybody is employing all their available=
 resources just to keep up in the mining race since there are only so many =
carts instead of just to leisurely utilise surplus resources for an opportu=
ne find. Each block is a new gold
 mine. It is enough for everybody to use leisurely resources.</div>
<div style=3D"font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;=
 color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div style=3D"font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;=
 color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
I have initiated conversation previously regarding a method to regulate min=
ing, and believe whole heartedly it should happen. That is necessary for th=
e future stability of Bitcoin as it is clear the rate of work cannot be all=
owed to increase at such a rate.
 If you search the bitcoin-dev archives you will find discussion there unde=
r my email as we search for a solution.<br>
</div>
<div style=3D"font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;=
 color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div style=3D"font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;=
 color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
KING JAMES HRMH
<div>Great British Empire</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Regards,</div>
<div>The Australian</div>
<div>LORD HIS EXCELLENCY JAMES HRMH (&amp; HMRH)</div>
<div>of Hougun Manor &amp; Glencoe &amp; British Empire</div>
<div>MR. Damian A. James Williamson</div>
<div>Wills</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>et al.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Willtech</div>
<div>www.willtech.com.au</div>
<div>www.go-overt.com</div>
<div>and other projects</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>earn.com/willtech</div>
<div>linkedin.com/in/damianwilliamson</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>m. 0487135719</div>
<div>f. +61261470192</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
This email does not constitute a general advice. Please disregard this emai=
l if misdelivered.<br>
</div>
<div>
<hr tabindex=3D"-1" style=3D"display:inline-block; width:98%">
<div id=3D"divRplyFwdMsg" dir=3D"ltr"><font style=3D"font-size:11pt" face=
=3D"Calibri, sans-serif" color=3D"#000000"><b>From:</b> bitcoin-dev &lt;bit=
coin-dev-bounces@lists.linuxfoundation.org&gt; on behalf of Keagan McClella=
nd via bitcoin-dev &lt;bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org&gt;<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, 11 May 2021 1:01 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Bitcoin Protocol Discussion &lt;bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundatio=
n.org&gt;; Erik Aronesty &lt;erik@q32.com&gt;<br>
<b>Cc:</b> SatoshiSingh &lt;SatoshiSingh@protonmail.com&gt;<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [bitcoin-dev] Opinion on proof of stake in future</font=
>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
</div>
<div>
<div dir=3D"auto">To reiterate some of the points here. My problem with pro=
of of stake is twofold.&nbsp;</div>
<div dir=3D"auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir=3D"auto">1. It requires permission of coin holders to enter into t=
he system. This is not true of proof of work. You may even attempt (though =
not successfully) a proof of work with pencil and paper and submit the bloc=
k from a regular laptop if you so
 choose. Whether this level of permissionlessness is necessary is up to ind=
ividual risk tolerance etc. but it is definitely the default preference of =
Bitcoin.</div>
<div dir=3D"auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir=3D"auto">2. Proof of stake must have a trusted means of timestampi=
ng to regulate overproduction of blocks. This introduction of trust is gene=
rally considered to be a nonstarter in Bitcoin. Proof of Work regulates thi=
s by making blocks fundamentally difficult
 to produce in the first place.</div>
<div dir=3D"auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir=3D"auto">Like Jeremy, I=92m always interested to learn about new a=
ttempts in consensus algorithms, but the bar to clear is very high and proo=
f of stake to date has not proposed much less demonstrated a set of propert=
ies that is consistent with Bitcoins
 objectives.</div>
<div dir=3D"auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir=3D"auto">Keagan</div>
<div><br>
<div class=3D"x_gmail_quote">
<div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"x_gmail_attr">On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 8:43 AM Eri=
k Aronesty via bitcoin-dev &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfou=
ndation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class=3D"x_gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; bord=
er-left-width:1px; border-left-style:solid; padding-left:1ex; border-left-c=
olor:rgb(204,204,204)">
personally, not speaking for anyone else, i think that proof-of-burn<br>
has a much higher likelihood of being a) good enough security and b)<br>
solving the nothing-at-stake problem<br>
<br>
&nbsp;the only issue i see with a quality PoB implementation is a robust<br=
>
solution to the block-timing problem.<br>
<br>
<a href=3D"https://grisha.org/blog/2018/01/23/explaining-proof-of-work/" re=
l=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://grisha.org/blog/2018/01/23/expla=
ining-proof-of-work/</a><br>
<br>
i do think there *could* be other low-energy solutions to verifiable<br>
timing, just haven't seen one<br>
<br>
<br>
On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 6:50 PM SatoshiSingh via bitcoin-dev<br>
&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_bla=
nk">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Hello list,<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; I am a lurker here and like many of you I worry about the energy usage=
 of bitcoin mining. I understand a lot mining happens with renewable resour=
ces but the impact is still high.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; I want to get your opinion on implementing proof of stake for bitcoin =
mining in future. For now, proof of stake is still untested and not battle =
tested like proof of work. Though someday it will be.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; In the following years we'll be seeing proof of stake being implemente=
d. Smaller networks can test PoS which is a luxury bitcoin can't afford. He=
re's how I see this the possibilities:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; 1 - Proof of stake isn't a good enough security mechanism<br>
&gt; 2 - Proof of state is a good security mechanism and works as intended<=
br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; IF PoS turns out to be good after battle testing, would you consider i=
mplementing it for Bitcoin? I understand this would invoke a lot of controv=
ersies and a hard fork that no one likes. But its important enough to consi=
der a hard fork. What are your opinions
 provided PoS does work?<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Love from India.<br>
&gt; _______________________________________________<br>
&gt; bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
&gt; <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_bl=
ank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
&gt; <a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-=
dev" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>

--_000_PS2P216MB10897B23359226ADA4859AE89D549PS2P216MB1089KORP_--