1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
|
Return-Path: <eric@voskuil.org>
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B05F9C0001
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 7 May 2021 23:04:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85AE64196C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 7 May 2021 23:04:46 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=voskuil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 tc-3gZ11gKiB
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 7 May 2021 23:04:45 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from mail-pg1-x52a.google.com (mail-pg1-x52a.google.com
[IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52a])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 23005418C0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 7 May 2021 23:04:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-pg1-x52a.google.com with SMTP id i5so3681722pgm.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 07 May 2021 16:04:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=voskuil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id
:references:in-reply-to:to;
bh=rnkIqGF+7tPhff/G7FRjI7ozav11auJqzKRDebHCNjI=;
b=BKMl2ym/JQDo8+8NBpqcePyg9487C95WyK06xGtWplUJYBRUpxTq6HlspHJzuzPDeb
Whji8QKA7hWsrr6z5KDEKApvfE3Mp2WadBM0BiNQDA9pgZrReahQhWeAUs3s/QnBdTqC
EpLwjwlWvZpNe1YXfzTXRj0gXIWtr5OYulvEt902FCoZySAf5mve170ayzqRn02xZINn
NsLgCKfUn4np492273TKIZx9i8s+Qhbr06wxPHYO1hWY9Xon/xA2OOKnbPa/ieMgczmN
aK3+K0Y6q4r+oMbwDgV5dugeyePDdORb3O6Vm8l84xktGObOXettuQvU4diug4w70fh+
+VYw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version
:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to:to;
bh=rnkIqGF+7tPhff/G7FRjI7ozav11auJqzKRDebHCNjI=;
b=eTckVFk3I4nfJ7Yj+Wyf70UgEvdLcTqtiZQu/vW0J/Q7so7TrPfS5G6s7COBb4mpeE
rYk38bwJoszNr7f8vc2Xy3hZYLA7qutyBfZeaZa+rFNeFVv9G0KJSg3zHbzj4DzbhQod
mGeP7ylHh/8oxJIsE4a+X8pRoItuvS2HIomOiIaiOSryD7EvaAPJKcJDUzubsCOQXeq/
Yya51k4a1WfNpAxE6vjs1nrUxCdvqfpMHTibpnSjMOS38D97F41GkuauDRLe9m4Nn/F+
A8J2FgKaNri7WmvRdpBa6AIIAFtQqbYN5qjNJQHOYQIPnMeTYWUaW2g4T6NdBA5YTSBs
A8Uw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531Sc+iOTJIYszLcnTxpc3oSA0t7PBA+fKgMUsPvQI04+xer4X/M
GPpMLrQR0YMJZgXSiDu0nhWbrg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx7AxYanyVbkQGjR34YZG0b+aZ9WtJ6FGVqRBYqmWrk3hNgZoXEPlOsvPVDgdcIALY4rv97bw==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:5910:: with SMTP id n16mr12761950pgb.351.1620428684602;
Fri, 07 May 2021 16:04:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:600:9c00:1d0::1229? ([2601:600:9c00:1d0::1229])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a190sm5612941pfb.185.2021.05.07.16.04.43
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128);
Fri, 07 May 2021 16:04:43 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=Apple-Mail-5C8F375C-8015-4E40-9118-1E5B0B712439
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Fri, 7 May 2021 16:04:19 -0700
Message-Id: <6C68BF06-522B-41D3-BF3A-17D900C51BD1@voskuil.org>
References: <6do5xN2g5LPnFeM55iJ-4C4MyXOu_KeXxy68Xt4dJQMhi3LJ8ZrLICmEUlh8JGfDmsDG12m1JDAh0e0huwK_MlyKpdfn22ru3zsm7lYLfBo=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <6do5xN2g5LPnFeM55iJ-4C4MyXOu_KeXxy68Xt4dJQMhi3LJ8ZrLICmEUlh8JGfDmsDG12m1JDAh0e0huwK_MlyKpdfn22ru3zsm7lYLfBo=@protonmail.com>
To: SatoshiSingh <SatoshiSingh@protonmail.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18D70)
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: Fri, 07 May 2021 23:04:46 -0000
--Apple-Mail-5C8F375C-8015-4E40-9118-1E5B0B712439
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
https://github.com/libbitcoin/libbitcoin-system/wiki/Proof-of-Stake-Fallacy
> On May 7, 2021, at 15:50, SatoshiSingh via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.=
linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>=20
> =EF=BB=BFHello list,
>=20
> I am a lurker here and like many of you I worry about the energy usage of b=
itcoin mining. I understand a lot mining happens with renewable resources bu=
t the impact is still high.
>=20
> I want to get your opinion on implementing proof of stake for bitcoin mini=
ng in future. For now, proof of stake is still untested and not battle teste=
d like proof of work. Though someday it will be.
>=20
> In the following years we'll be seeing proof of stake being implemented. S=
maller networks can test PoS which is a luxury bitcoin can't afford. Here's h=
ow I see this the possibilities:
>=20
> 1 - Proof of stake isn't a good enough security mechanism
> 2 - Proof of state is a good security mechanism and works as intended
>=20
> IF PoS turns out to be good after battle testing, would you consider imple=
menting it for Bitcoin? I understand this would invoke a lot of controversie=
s and a hard fork that no one likes. But its important enough to consider a h=
ard fork. What are your opinions provided PoS does work?
>=20
> Love from India.
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
--Apple-Mail-5C8F375C-8015-4E40-9118-1E5B0B712439
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"content-type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3D=
utf-8"></head><body dir=3D"auto"><div dir=3D"ltr"><a href=3D"https://github.=
com/libbitcoin/libbitcoin-system/wiki/Proof-of-Stake-Fallacy">https://github=
.com/libbitcoin/libbitcoin-system/wiki/Proof-of-Stake-Fallacy</a></div><div d=
ir=3D"ltr"><br><blockquote type=3D"cite">On May 7, 2021, at 15:50, SatoshiSi=
ngh via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:<br>=
<br></blockquote></div><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div dir=3D"ltr">=EF=BB=BF<=
span>Hello list,</span><br><span></span><br><span>I am a lurker here and lik=
e 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.=
</span><br><span></span><br><span>I want to get your opinion on implementing=
proof of stake for bitcoin mining in future. For now, proof of stake is sti=
ll untested and not battle tested like proof of work. Though someday it will=
be.</span><br><span></span><br><span>In the following years we'll be seeing=
proof of stake being implemented. Smaller networks can test PoS which is a l=
uxury bitcoin can't afford. Here's how I see this the possibilities:</span><=
br><span></span><br><span>1 - Proof of stake isn't a good enough security me=
chanism</span><br><span>2 - Proof of state is a good security mechanism and w=
orks as intended</span><br><span></span><br><span>IF PoS turns out to be goo=
d after battle testing, would you consider implementing it for Bitcoin? I un=
derstand this would invoke a lot of controversies and a hard fork that no on=
e likes. But its important enough to consider a hard fork. What are your opi=
nions provided PoS does work?</span><br><span></span><br><span>Love from Ind=
ia.</span><br><span>_______________________________________________</span><b=
r><span>bitcoin-dev mailing list</span><br><span>bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoun=
dation.org</span><br><span>https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinf=
o/bitcoin-dev</span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>=
--Apple-Mail-5C8F375C-8015-4E40-9118-1E5B0B712439--
|
