If you hold cryptocurrencies secured by anything other than proof of work, then you should know that there are grave issues regarding the security of funds which you won’t be able to read about in their white papers.
You're an apologist for thieves and conmen. Try not to infect others with your ignorance, greed, or whatever flaw you possess that makes you think theft is ok.
I am disappointed by how poorly proof of stake works for protecting and securing the network, *and it's constituents* from attacking each other.
Instead of shrugging off the attacks, the network allowed for centralisation and significant losses to occur by multiple parties, and has ruined trust in both parts of the network.
In a system which requires collective action and openness to work, in order to provide security in a trustless environment, one cannot use proof of stake as a consensus system.
I am against theft. And I am against any system which facilitates it. And that is one of several reasons I am against proof of stake.
> Alice reacted by forking the entire network and deleted Bob and Carlos on the way.
Anyone can fork a network at any time and in whatever state they see fit. This is called freedom of association.
Alice may have acted poorly by censoring Bob's transactions. But this doesn't excuse Carlos' collusion and deception with exchanges in response.
Also, Carlos failed to secure its credentials allowing (an aspect of) Alice to send large amounts of funds to a some-what trusted exchange, where they sit to this day. What kind of idiot would fail to secure his credentials and expose himself to that kind of attack so easily?
Please write a prequel about how Bob first obtained all those funds and also a side-story about how Carlos colluded with three exchanges using their customers' money.
I'm pretty certain you're supporting the arguments in my post. Cartel actions meant that there was significant collateral damage to the communities.
Over centralization, a lack of openness and centralized governance will lead to precisely these problems to the detriment of an entire ecosystem. Every time.
You're an apologist for thieves and conmen. Try not to infect others with your ignorance, greed, or whatever flaw you possess that makes you think theft is ok.
His article is literally about how, unlike PoW, PoS enables theft and is NOT OK. Lmao 😂
I am disappointed by how poorly proof of stake works for protecting and securing the network, *and it's constituents* from attacking each other.
Instead of shrugging off the attacks, the network allowed for centralisation and significant losses to occur by multiple parties, and has ruined trust in both parts of the network.
In a system which requires collective action and openness to work, in order to provide security in a trustless environment, one cannot use proof of stake as a consensus system.
I am against theft. And I am against any system which facilitates it. And that is one of several reasons I am against proof of stake.
> Alice reacted by forking the entire network and deleted Bob and Carlos on the way.
Anyone can fork a network at any time and in whatever state they see fit. This is called freedom of association.
Alice may have acted poorly by censoring Bob's transactions. But this doesn't excuse Carlos' collusion and deception with exchanges in response.
Also, Carlos failed to secure its credentials allowing (an aspect of) Alice to send large amounts of funds to a some-what trusted exchange, where they sit to this day. What kind of idiot would fail to secure his credentials and expose himself to that kind of attack so easily?
Everyone suffered here. And it will happen over and over again in any system which is built on Proof of Stake.
Please write a prequel about how Bob first obtained all those funds and also a side-story about how Carlos colluded with three exchanges using their customers' money.
I'm pretty certain you're supporting the arguments in my post. Cartel actions meant that there was significant collateral damage to the communities.
Over centralization, a lack of openness and centralized governance will lead to precisely these problems to the detriment of an entire ecosystem. Every time.
Uh, who is bob here again? Steemit, Inc right? How did they obtain those funds
I think this is about the money-elected delegates stealing coins and Justin money-forking them back.