Thread
The innovation behind PoW is precisely the fact that it *doesn't* rely exclusively on software (an abstraction) to keep the ledger systemically secure, but instead incorporates real-world physics (watts) to impose real-world physical constraints on people/computers who run it.
Stake is an abstraction. It is an imaginary way to describe the complex emergent behavior of a bunch of general-purpose state machines. The state machines may physically exist, but the way you choose to visualize the complex emergent behavior of those machines is imaginary.
Satoshi didn't couple control authority over ledger to abstract, imaginary things like "stake" or "coin" precisely b/c these things don't physically exist. If they don't physically exist, they are incapable of imposing real-world physical costs on ppl seeking control of ledger.
The real-world physical cost of controlling the ledger is what keeps control over the ledger decentralized. It is too physically expensive (in watts) to gain & maintain centralized control over the #BTC ledger.
In PoS, there is no physical cost of gaining centralized control.
In PoS, there is no physical cost of gaining centralized control.
Why? Because stake doesn't physically exist. So all it takes to gain centralized control is majority stake. And once you have it (which, because of math, some combination of people already do), you have it forever.
Mentions
See All
Hugo Nguyen @hugohanoi
·
Sep 21, 2022
Great thread. I’m 100% aligned with @JasonPLowery on PoW as long as he stays away from the “PoW is violence” analogy. 🙂 Violence is also an abstraction, the same way stake is an abstraction. Whereas energy usage is rooted in physics. Ground your arguments in math/physics (!).