path: root/d5/f1c2848a146360b0da4756ffded98d39bea9dd

Return-Path: <prayank@tutanota.de>
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::138])
 by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD848C0001
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sat,  8 May 2021 10:21:08 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4DB9843A0
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sat,  8 May 2021 10:21:08 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.601
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
 DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,
 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001,
 SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
 dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=tutanota.de
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id fDzifnIUehIT
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sat,  8 May 2021 10:21:07 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from w1.tutanota.de (w1.tutanota.de [81.3.6.162])
 by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5955383F15
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sat,  8 May 2021 10:21:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from w3.tutanota.de (unknown [192.168.1.164])
 by w1.tutanota.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D098FA0325;
 Sat,  8 May 2021 10:21:04 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1620469264; 
 s=s1; d=tutanota.de;
 h=From:From:To:To:Subject:Subject:Content-Description:Content-ID:Content-Type:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Cc:Date:Date:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Message-ID:Reply-To:References:Sender;
 bh=c1X7fDqm8a0jV4uoaoyC+0Z+h7fTNg5Ev+agrQVfnlo=;
 b=JsJVoK778yCnDkiAvlzgNYF+bs+QiJq6oRYvmTPvDzjJAxtFGA2xkAYxrDQ6bF5+
 BpO9t3PDc8k63xiuGNfloeSJ7U+TOWG5J3x0iVyoIgSVWu94oedtql5LfebHOqhIJE0
 g5N8lVtwByBJRM109YRl8amnsAL4WmhzsYzeuRjOulMcAfzbZXhvE1jNJeAwkUisZmD
 /3Q0ZCsJ913Px0s29lvZ9mw/R0ZOfNO2QZAtBLYdz9npGBRJQyYihlw95iwUGP0o2t0
 YU0U9UnhMLs2XvYvnctZTnhhnXbJGcwIc/lRZLKaLotlHCr8g9Luk3emUobkKnNGkeC
 o/B66Uzx7g==
Date: Sat, 8 May 2021 12:21:04 +0200 (CEST)
From: Prayank <prayank@tutanota.de>
To: satoshisingh@protonmail.com
Message-ID: <M_AUeYf--F-2@tutanota.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
 boundary="----=_Part_96836_271819063.1620469264174"
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 08 May 2021 12:20:53 +0000
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
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: Sat, 08 May 2021 10:21:08 -0000

------=_Part_96836_271819063.1620469264174
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

My opinion:

1.I don't consider PoS to be a better consensus mechanism compared to PoW u=
sed in Bitcoin. So any proposal related to PoS in Bitcoin is not an improve=
ment for me.
=C2=A0
2.Bitcoin is a protocol for decentralized network that creates consensus wi=
thout needing a central authority to provide trust. Bitcoin with PoS will b=
e a protocol for a network that creates consensus based on bitcoin holdings=
.

3.Experiments with PoS can work in trust minimized applications that use Bi=
tcoin or LN or Bitcoin sidechains. However, PoW works better for base layer=
 or Bitcoin protocol.

4.Bitcoin protocol should not be changed based on mainstream media articles=
, new buzzwords or trends, altcoins, governments etc.=C2=A0

5.Everything involves trade-offs. Not everything needs to be online. Not ev=
erything needs to be on a chain of blocks. There are things that you would =
prefer to save in a spreadsheet offline or write on a paper. Similarly PoS =
is not the best consensus mechanism for a 'decentralized network' but it ma=
y work for projects(not decentralized) that want to use Bitcoin for few thi=
ngs.

6.Most of the Bitcoin users and devs consider PoW used in Bitcoin as the be=
st consensus mechanism. Few people experimenting with PoS will result in an=
other altcoin with nothing much to contribute in improving Bitcoin. I think=
 there are better things to focus on and one of them is privacy.

Few things related to Bitcoin mining that I consider improvements:

-Stratum v2
-More countries started mining bitcoin recently
-Recycling ASIC heat:=C2=A0https://braiins.com/blog/green-innovation-in-bit=
coin-mining-recycling-asic-heat

I would love to see people in India researching about creating better ASICs=
 and more involved in Bitcoin mining.=C2=A0

Related links:

https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/95356/why-doesnt-bitcoin-migrat=
e-to-proof-of-stake

https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/asic-faq.pdf=C2=A0(Andrew Poelstra)

https://medium.com/@dsl_uiuc/fake-stake-attacks-on-chain-based-proof-of-sta=
ke-cryptocurrencies-b8b05723f806


--=20
 Prayank

------=_Part_96836_271819063.1620469264174
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=3DUTF-8=
">
  </head>
  <body>
<div>My opinion:<br></div><div><br></div><div>1.I don't consider PoS to be =
a better consensus mechanism compared to PoW used in Bitcoin. So any propos=
al related to PoS in Bitcoin is not an improvement for me.<br></div><div>&n=
bsp;<br></div><div>2.Bitcoin is a protocol for decentralized network that c=
reates consensus without needing a central authority to provide trust. Bitc=
oin with PoS will be a protocol for a network that creates consensus based =
on bitcoin holdings.<br></div><div><br></div><div>3.Experiments with PoS ca=
n work in trust minimized applications that use Bitcoin or LN or Bitcoin si=
dechains. However, PoW works better for base layer or Bitcoin protocol.<br>=
</div><div><br></div><div>4.Bitcoin protocol should not be changed based on=
 mainstream media articles, new buzzwords or trends, altcoins, governments =
etc.&nbsp;<br></div><div><br></div><div>5.Everything involves trade-offs. N=
ot everything needs to be online. Not everything needs to be on a chain of =
blocks. There are things that you would prefer to save in a spreadsheet off=
line or write on a paper. Similarly PoS is not the best consensus mechanism=
 for a 'decentralized network' but it may work for projects(not decentraliz=
ed) that want to use Bitcoin for few things.<br></div><div><br></div><div>6=
.Most of the Bitcoin users and devs consider PoW used in Bitcoin as the bes=
t consensus mechanism. Few people experimenting with PoS will result in ano=
ther altcoin with nothing much to contribute in improving Bitcoin. I think =
there are better things to focus on and one of them is privacy.<br></div><d=
iv><br></div><div>Few things related to Bitcoin mining that I consider impr=
ovements:<br></div><div><br></div><div>-Stratum v2<br></div><div>-More coun=
tries started mining bitcoin recently<br></div><div>-Recycling ASIC heat:&n=
bsp;<a href=3D"https://braiins.com/blog/green-innovation-in-bitcoin-mining-=
recycling-asic-heat" rel=3D"noopener noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://=
braiins.com/blog/green-innovation-in-bitcoin-mining-recycling-asic-heat</a>=
<br></div><div><br></div><div>I would love to see people in India researchi=
ng about creating better ASICs and more involved in Bitcoin mining.&nbsp;<b=
r></div><div><br></div><div>Related links:<br></div><div><br></div><div><a =
href=3D"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/95356/why-doesnt-bitcoi=
n-migrate-to-proof-of-stake" rel=3D"noopener noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">=
https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/95356/why-doesnt-bitcoin-migrat=
e-to-proof-of-stake</a><br></div><div><br></div><div><a href=3D"https://dow=
nload.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/asic-faq.pdf" rel=3D"noopener noreferrer" targ=
et=3D"_blank">https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/asic-faq.pdf</a>&nbsp=
;(Andrew Poelstra)<br></div><div><br></div><div><a href=3D"https://medium.c=
om/@dsl_uiuc/fake-stake-attacks-on-chain-based-proof-of-stake-cryptocurrenc=
ies-b8b05723f806">https://medium.com/@dsl_uiuc/fake-stake-attacks-on-chain-=
based-proof-of-stake-cryptocurrencies-b8b05723f806</a><br></div><div><br></=
div><div><br></div><div>-- <br></div><div> Prayank<br></div>  </body>
</html>

------=_Part_96836_271819063.1620469264174--