Fuck I’m selling ETH

[Anonymous No.12385204]

Right now

[Anonymous No.12385254]

VB is right but why is it taking so long to move Ethereum to proof of stake? Every year proof of stake seems to be one more year away and now Ethereum ASICs are appearing. To me it seems Ethereum is making the same mistake as Vertcoin by not dealing with the ASIC issue ASAP.

[Anonymous No.12385279]

>>12385204
You dont want to do that bro

[O1G No.12385295]

>>12385254
>Every year proof of stake seems to be one more year away
because pos is cancer
they are trying to do it right but it can't be done right.

[Anonymous No.12385296]

[Anonymous No.12385312]

>>12385204
why buy eth. its 30 BILLION marketcap... why not buy chx at only 9 million marketcap? ico's are dead. sto's are the future

[Anonymous No.12385316]

>>12385312
What’s chx ?

[Anonymous No.12385322]

>>12385316
0x Chainlink

[Anonymous No.12385336]

>>12385204
What he wrote is true, what's your issue?

[Anonymous No.12385343]

>>12385204
>>12385254
>>12385295

Proof of Work is temporal Proof of Stake: with money you buy hash power to influence the network. With enough money you could do 51% attack.

Proof of Stake allows you to buy with money voting power to influence the network. With enough money you could do 51% attack.

Almost no difference, still human governance so everything is a big joke.

[Anonymous No.12385353]

>>12385312
STOs are just ICOs done correctly!
STOs are not 'crypto' it's merely a blockchain IPO. similar to ICOs but registered
Happy to see moving away form the fraudulent ICO model

[Anonymous No.12385371]

>>12385343
A POS coin is much, much harder to 51% attack because you need to acquire at least enough coins to match the amount being staked. For even the shittiest POS coin that's almost impossible because trying to buy enough coins would drive the price to insane levels.

[Anonymous No.12385406]

>>12385371
This is 100% correct. I was going to reply with the same thing but I decided I didn't want to argue with some idiot on /biz/. Even with unlimited funds, you're at the mercy of how many coins are up for sale. It could just be 10% of the total supply. If the order books get cleared then the price will skyrocket. By the time you have enough to do a 51% attack, you'll be a giant bagholder.

Which is why, Proof of Stake > Proof of Work.

[O1G No.12385407]

>>12385343
you are looking at it all wrong.
pow: 51% hashrate reached and abused -> fork the pow algo hashrate now useless start again with gpu mining!
pos: 51% share reached there is no going back there is no consensus out of the capture no way to save the coin for the majority!
also pow has memory, so to speak you can't completely rewrite history with a total reorg, however pos once majority of coins ownership reached can do whatever the fuck it wants.

the only way pos coins can exist if they tether to btc (or the biggest hashrate pow chain) against deep reorgs and even then it's problematic because 51% share means total control including censorship forever for the coin.

[Anonymous No.12385411]

>>12385371
I'm trying to think of how this wouldn't end up a ponzi scheme... imagine, staking rewards are okayish but it doesn't have any other costs. One investment and then continual stable income... wouldn't like 99% of the coin be for staking? And then, because the remaining supply, for commerce or smart contracts, is so tiny that the first big cash out will crash the whole thing and there will be still 95% of coins ready to be dumped, just like a ponzi

[O1G No.12385417]

>>12385371
you can reach 51% any time either by collaboration of major holders or off the book buys from major holders. safety is an illusion. and again once majority share reached there is no going back no remedy.

[O1G No.12385428]

>>12385411
that's an other problem if too much of the coin base is used for staking the currency becomes useless as currency. this is also a problem with ln. ln hubs need huge amount of btc to work well and route reliably.

[Anonymous No.12385452]

>>12385254
because ETH codebase is poorly planned and is an absolute clusterfuck. Vitalik does not know how to move ETH to proof of stake and when he eventually figures out how to do so, he has to try to implement it on the fly in a system not designed for it without fucking up the entire system. you think its taking a long time? lmao you will be waiting for several more YEARS

[O1G No.12385460]

>>12385452
more like the problem is eth doesn't work without miners

[Anonymous No.12385476]

>>12385204
All decentralized coins are able to be 51%ed as chink satoshi pointed out. Eth classic has no one building on top of it, you lost, give it up.
Its like holding the bags on an outdated obsolete coin version of another coin thats itself outdated and obsolete, but that has 20x the acceptance.
Theres shit not even out yet thats going to blow eth out of the water. I have zero Tron and Id rather be in that than eth.

[Anonymous No.12385484]

>>12385417
I'm no POS expert but why would the major holders collaborate to destroy a coin they are holding? A 51% attack means the coin price would collapse before they can sell their bags. The only scenario I could imagine would be if they found a way to short those coins with huge leverage so the gains from the coin price falling offsets their own losses.

[O1G No.12385493]

>>12385460
which means the base incentives of the eth ecosystem are at jeopardy if you fuck with pow.
tinier risks held back the hand of crypto devs before than this clusterfuck.

[Anonymous No.12385523]

>>12385411
I doubt it. Most current POS coins only have between 10% and 20% of their coins being actively staked. Ethereum will probably be the same way if it ever goes POS. A lot of ETH will also be used in decentralized finance smart contracts like Maker DAO or Compound.Finance to gain interest and will be automatically traded as needed to operate stablecoins like DAI.

[O1G No.12385531]

>>12385484
in a pos ecosystem the 51% shareholder can keep the entire coin hostage. and yes shorting (in case of eth there is a crapton of derivative tokens) may make it extremely profitable.

[O1G No.12385538]

>>12385523
i'm not sure why would you need more stable coins like dai. for now the usd is the end all measure of value.

[Anonymous No.12385540]

>>12385406
Proof of stake does not have security driven by competition

[Anonymous No.12385552]

>>12385204
Ok guys

Can you please stop all trading?

[Anonymous No.12385563]

>>12385531
For a coin like Ethereum though acquiring enough ETH for a 51% attack would be an inside job which there is no real defense against whether it's POW or POS. I'm just saying POS protects a coin from being "mugged" by an outsider (presumably) using cheaply and readily available hashrate like what just happened to ETC.

[Anonymous No.12385573]

>mfw coins are becoming paypal 2.0 with a bunch of faggots being able to seize ur shitcoins cuz they feel like it and got majority stake

fuck this im out, going back to cash

[O1G No.12385585]

>>12385563
well pow is also an early distribution scheme you can't buy up the bulk of money supply for pennies for the currency of the future. i'm not saying in case of eth it would be easy to get 51% i'm saying if anyone got it you would never know until too late. because there is no limit to the addresses a person can hold.

[Anonymous No.12385589]

>>12385312
Ideally ETH will cease being a currency and simply function as the backbone to a network comprised of a handful (not thousands of shitcoins) of protocols that cart out the following:
>Deflationary Currency
>Payment Protocol that competes with Pay Pal
>Seamless Currency Swapping/Conversion
>Dark Pool Exchange
>Cloud Computing
>Smart Contract Auditing
>Smart Contract protocol to LINK all on and off chain systems and networks

Seems like a developers and entrepreneurs wet dream. So much potential in this space. If only there were such protocols in the works as we shitpost.

[O1G No.12385606]

>>12385563
pos protects the coin if well distributed same as hashrate protects the coin if well distributed. same shit. but hashrate is finicky in that some of it is global and cross coin.

this is why there should not be two pow chains at the same time ever. not within the same family of pow certainly.

attack on etc is like an attack on bch an obvious consequence of being the minority chain. satoshi told you from the get go abandon the minority chain asap! it's not secure.

[Anonymous No.12385651]

>>12385589
I dont even want to hype up what is going to beat ETH because I dont have enough accumulated and they parse these forums for bot feed info. Lets just say it took a huge fucking hit from its ATH

[Anonymous No.12385663]

>>12385606
Another massive intended side effect Craig is implying with PoW is competition in technology. You will have countries pushing for faster tech. It’s going to launch us into the actual technology singularity. And stop these companies from consumerism cucking us from mild tech upgrades every two years. It’s going to be exponential the advances we achieve. He wrote an article about unlimited bandwidth the other day.

[O1G No.12385665]

vitalik said he wants to implement a pos where a bad actor gets his stake burned. (thus possibly increasing the price of the asset in case of an attack) but i have not found anything on who and how can punish a majority stake holder? what consensus can result in the minority destroying the stake of the majority? how? what prevents this from being abused? anyone has some info on this??

[Anonymous No.12385667]

>>12385585
I mostly agree with you but getting a staking majority for a POS coin is vastly more difficult and expensive than buying enough hashrate to 51% a POW blockchain for an hour. It would also be very noticeable due to exchange activity. For example, 4chan's own POS coin Pandacoin has a $2.5 million market cap and 15% of the coins are currently staking. To 51% Pandacoin you would need to acquire at least 15% of the existing coins which costs about $375k at the current price of 2 satoshis. Of course if you tried to buy that many Pandacoins it would clear out all the exchange order books and spike the price meaning it would likely take several million dollars to acquire enough coins for a 51%. That's for a tiny market cap coin like Pandacoin. Imagine somebody trying to do that for ETH without the dev team/foundation or other major stakeholders noticing.
>I just realized that Pandacoin's blockchain is more secure than Ethereum Classic's blockchain

[Anonymous No.12385670]

>>12385204
kek

[O1G No.12385673]

>>12385663
>unlimited bandwidth
last time it was just unlimited block size to store cp on his immutable metanet blockchain now he wants to rape physics too.

[O1G No.12385683]

>>12385667
you don't have to market buy all in one day. an operation like this can take months with bots buying tiny amounts with limit orders and even market selling to make people dump into those orders. i don't believe a patient actor has trouble to accumulate a serious percent of a coins base supply even below spot.

as for pow, i doubt you could buy enough hash to 51% bitcoin for an hour. the distribution of the mining hardware is pretty well tracked and limited in new supply.

[Anonymous No.12385689]

>>12385407
That's why it's taking time, they don't want to fuck it up.

[Anonymous No.12385696]

>>12385673
Sorry he shared this

[O1G No.12385703]

>>12385689
or they can't solve this problem: >>12385665

[O1G No.12385719]

>>12385696
so the guy who is a journalist not an engineer or something wrote a book about how society would be changed by infinite bandwith and our doctor of philosophy faketoshi gaylord wright pounced on it on twitter?

wow that's deep.

[Anonymous No.12385747]

>>12385719
Some of you are alright, dont hodl shitcoin SV

[Anonymous No.12385764]

>>12385651
Literally everything did. Be cryptic enough for a bot not to notice. Like they will even care. Otherwise larp.

[Anonymous No.12385770]

>>12385254

the answer is his own tweet, they are incompetent

[Anonymous No.12385773]

>>12385703
They're trying to plan a way that there is no majority stake holder to begin with.

[Anonymous No.12385812]

>>12385764
I dont want you buying it either. Eth has a shit language and shit limitations. The things in development now, with POS, will be what people build on. EOS has already failed, even Larimer jumped ship. Ill say that much.

[Anonymous No.12385814]

Actually, Litecoins going to pass EOS, likely within the next couple weeks. It just rose like 3 spots and XLM buyers are kidding themselves if they think they can come back.

[Anonymous No.12385816]

>>12385683
>as for pow, i doubt you could buy enough hash to 51% bitcoin for an hour.
Maybe not for Bitcoin but Ethereum block rewards are going down fast meaning mining is less profitable and more GPU rental hashrate will be available at cheaper prices. In a year or two Ethereum could be facing the same problem as ETC unless it moves to POS.

[O1G No.12385830]

>>12385773
there is no possible guarantee to that. 51% share may be reached at any time and there is no going back. seriously in the future a multi trillion dollar ecosystem based on eth can be held hostage overnight by 2-3 major stakeholder merging their stake either because they were part of the same interest to begin with or decided to cooperate in an exit scam they somehow made profitable.

then there is the problem of miners. there is no incentive for miners to switch to pos. they can't transfer their share of hashrate to eth stake without further investment.

i can see a hybrid system in the future of eth if they go ahead with sharding. where the shards will be pos validated but there is a spine chain that remain pow. this sidesteps the fragmentation of the hashrate among shards increases the throughput of the eth ecosystem allows for natural localization of smart contracts and payments... fuck knows but it's sure as hell not easy.

[Anonymous No.12385844]

>>12385279
kek

[O1G No.12385846]

>>12385816
>Maybe not for Bitcoin
yeah but again why is there any other pow chain aside from btc? there is no point. any chain can use btc pow for security by tethering to it against catastrophic reorgs.

[Anonymous No.12385848]

>>12385683
>i don't believe a patient actor has trouble to accumulate a serious percent of a coins base supply
If that ever happens to Ethereum and a 51% attack occurred they would just roll back the blockchain to reverse the 51% attack
>>inb4 they would never do that. They already did. One of the reasons given for rolling back The DAO fuckup was to prevent the thief from having enough coins to do a 51% attack when Ethereum goes POS

[Anonymous No.12385858]

>>12385279
He ain't selling bro.

[Anonymous No.12385862]

>>12385846
>yeah but again why is there any other pow chain aside from btc?
Well Litecoin and Dogecoin are scrypt and can't be mined by SHA ASICs so that's why those two coins exist.

[O1G No.12385871]

>>12385848
>If that ever happens to Ethereum and a 51% attack occurred they would just roll back the blockchain to reverse the 51% attack
yay! you have centralized control over the shitcoin so you can just roll back any transaction vitalik doesn't like!

except if you think about it there is no single point of failure you can correct. you can't fuck with ownership that will destroy the coin by destroying the last shred of trust.

[Anonymous No.12385874]

In POS stake holders are incentivized to DDOS each other to get block reward. If I am not mistaken the more valuable pos system is, the more interesting it is to ddos other stake holders with fake copies of the chain.
I can be wrong, tho

[O1G No.12385882]

>>12385862
they are still nicehashable well litecoin would be hard as is now, but doge lol.

[O1G No.12385889]

>>12385874
yeah but so would miners in pow no? i can't see the difference in this regard for now.

[Anonymous No.12385919]

>>12385874
ddos is easy to protect from

[O1G No.12385956]

>>12385919
not so sure about that, but also unsure how anyone could profit from it. in pow it's computationally hard to produce a block and rather cheap to verify, in poos it's cheap to produce a block you can produce 100 different blocks and they would all be valid and make no difference to the other miners which one they pick. and if you produce an invalid block then your stake is at stake so to speak. you will bleed money out of your ass.

[Anonymous No.12385966]

>>12385889
yeah, i googled it. in pow it is happening already. So I guess the only way to reduce this incentive is to keep pow as decentralized as possible. or reduce block reward and keep the price low enough. or all 3.
if pos is the same, it should achieve the best possible decentralization it can. But the idea of pos is somewhat against decentralization. Idk, I am confused.

[Anonymous No.12385974]

>>12385919
I guess.

[Anonymous No.12385987]

>>12385862
>>12385846
Litecoin is superior to Bitcoin in speed and cost efficiency, the question is why does any other POW coin exist besides Litecoin. It shares all the ATMs, theres no reason to buy Bitcoin at one when Litecoins available. It has numerous advantages.

[Anonymous No.12385988]

>>12385919
I am confused, how a node will know which transaction is real and which is fake, without involving human review?

[O1G. No.12386009]

>>12385987
litecoin is a fucking joke always been but if it had the most hashpower i would switch most likely.
only 1 pow chain needed. no more.

[Anonymous No.12386016]

>>12385988
how does a pow miner know which transaction is real and which is fake, without involving human review?

[Anonymous No.12386027]

>>12385279
He only needs to train his neck a bit. Wow.

[Anonymous No.12386030]

>>12386016
I guess he does not. But decentralization reduces the incentive.

[Anonymous No.12386049]

>>12386009
>its a joke!
Thats not an argument. Its superior to bitcoin and all the other trash beneath it due to its acceptance in ATMs and high highfalutin financial contracts like options trading. Litecoin>all other trash, including shitcoin cash and Jewple.

[Anonymous No.12386102]

so i guess asics fucked up nakamoto consensus. unless pow is decentralized, it requires a lot more resources to operate.
and pos has complicated problems, it requires a lot more resources to operate than it seems to be.
you all just crazy and nuts.

[Anonymous No.12386149]

>>12385531
There isn't enough liquidity in the derivatives to make acquiring 51% then shorting worthwhile.

[Anonymous No.12386158]

Does it even make sense to talk about the magic number "51" for something not PoW? In PoS, is it even permitted to have two blocks in a row be produced by the same block producer? Are you all talking out of your ass?

[Anonymous No.12386181]

>>12385295
it can be done right.

look through the Cardano POS whitepaper, the first and still only whitepaper that describs a secure POS algo

[Anonymous No.12386202]

>>12385858
How could you sell this bra

[Anonymous No.12386225]

>>12385254
PoS over time will result in the same shit as we have with fiat right now.

[Anonymous No.12386252]

>>12385956
you don't need to ddos others on chain. your reputation will stay clean if you just produce fake copies of the chain and throw them from different ips that are not even remotely connected to your node' ip.
>>12386158
they think this world is a meme and compare things to each other by existing memes.

[Anonymous No.12386256]

MY main coin of choice at the moment is EOS. This FUD is basically telling me that ETH will stop sucking soon. Its not fud is bullish as fuck.

[O1G. No.12386261]

>>12386049
it's actually not superior in any objective way. it's just less secure more volatile.

[O1G. No.12386280]

>>12386252
first thing they check is the signature on the block. if it's not valid for the stake or there is no significant stake they discard it without looking into the block. so what you are proposing is unfeasible. in practice miners will know each others signatures and have it in a lookup table, they look at the hash of the pub key (few bytes string comparison) and throw away unknowns.

[Anonymous No.12386291]

>>12386027
training your neck doesn't widen your chin.
Honestly vitalik looks like he got poisoned by estrogenic chemicals in the canadian water. Looking at his chin structure, he was growing up to be a chad while in Russia, but then something happened in Canada.

[Anonymous No.12386309]

thats why ethereum is kicking out the freeloaders(miners).

the only proof of work chain that will survive long term is inevitably bitcoin, the economics simply dictate it.

[Anonymous No.12386352]

>>12386225
can you explain how you came to your blatantly wrong conclusion?

>>12386149
correct

>>12386309
btc good, eth good, maybe some others also, but anything not in top 20 and is not a token on eth is in trouble sooner or later

[Anonymous No.12386392]

>>12386280
Ok, that's distributed trust. It requires a lot of human resources to operate and it involves a lot more possible human errors than decentralized pow (which does not even exist anymore). Maybe less than paypal tho, however paypal can freeze your account if your activity is considered to be malicious, but it also protects your funds and refunds you if human error or vulnerability took place. Pos today gives you a wonderful opportunity to lose your funds forever without any guarantees. So it looks like proper pos requires even more human resources to make the system complete, proper pos maybe just a bit more effective than paypal, not dramatically effective. i guess we have what we have.
>>12386291
That's just magnesium and vitamin d deficiency during childhood and puberty. And yes, it is considered feminine, even if unhealthy.

[Anonymous No.12386517]

and if you force refund policy on pos nodes, the system will start to shrink until become fully centralized.
the idea is divided by zero. it's a dream, a vaporware, no more.
You can use your own eth ledger inside your company, if you find it effective, but you don't even need to pump the price for it. you don't need your eth on your own eth chain to worth anything.

[Anonymous No.12386695]

>>12385665
you can't prevent abuse of it, unless you hire a lot of employees to manually check.

[Anonymous No.12386704]

pos is a scam. pow is scam. what do?

[Anonymous No.12386868]

>>12386704

PoC

[Anonymous No.12386893]

hahah, what a centralised piece of shit.

[Anonymous No.12386905]

centralised piece of shit

[Anonymous No.12387225]

>>12385812
MonerEOS

[O1G. No.12387391]

>>12386392
yeah i think probably it can be automated but semi automatic even will make spam largely harmless and in case of valid signatures on an invalid block it will cost the staker.

so ddos is probably not the worst thing about pos. that's just how it feels.

again my problem with pos is if an actor or group legally gets 51% share of the staking coins it will be almost impossible to depose them.

a) vitalik hardforks them out of business (centralized intervention invalidates crypto)

b) they change the validation so that beside pos some dedicated nodes must also sign each new block (again this is trustful centralized pattern violates the base tenants of crypto)

with pow, you just change the fucking pow algo so the attacking group loses asic advantage gpu hash power is very distributed (without asics you can't really get 51% on a main pow chain).

future of crypto could be 3 separate powerbase keeping each other in check...

pow miners, pos stakers, and the governance appointed validating nodes.

the likelihood of a group being able to take over all 3 branches of authority is minuscule for a coin with real adoption. for random premined shitcoins the devs can do whatever the fuck they want anyhow.

[Anonymous No.12387579]

>>12385719
A number of Gilder's predictions came true. He's a famous futurist for a reason.