Litecoin comes out swinging against POS - Thoughts?

"[–]csolisr 8 points 3 days ago

Do you intend to add the proof of stake to your codebase someday, as Novacoin did?

permalink

[–]wtogamiwarren - Litecoin Dev 4 points 1 day ago*

No.

Reasons:

  1. That would be a fundamental change that many users will not accept. You do not change the jet engine midflight, especially when doing so would make it into a submarine or a bicycle.

  2. We thought hard about it and came to the conclusion it is a bad idea because it creates perverse incentives to centralized and bank coins. The Bitcoin devs also dislike it because it is a system where the rich get richer without doing any work.

"

[quote=“JustaBitofTime, post:1, topic:432”]Reasons:

  1. That would be a fundamental change that many users will not accept. You do not change the jet engine midflight, especially when doing so would make it into a submarine or a bicycle.

  2. We thought hard about it and came to the conclusion it is a bad idea because it creates perverse incentives to centralized and bank coins. The Bitcoin devs also dislike it because it is a system where the rich get richer without doing any work.

"[/quote]

  1. So rather than address the technical differences, they make an abstract metaphor that sheds no light into why they believe PoW is better than PoS. The only reason “users will not accept” the change is that users don’t want to lose their investment in mining gear. That’s not a valid reason for PoS being worse; that’s the realization that PoW-miner dominated cryptocurrency is in danger once the world at large is looking for a coin with the best features.

  2. “The rich get richer without doing any work”. That’s absurd. 1% is less than the inflation rate of Peercoin; if all you do is hold your coins, you’ll be poorer on a relative scale a year from now. To say nothing of the fact that the risk-free rate in most western economies is hovering around 3%. Meaning if you held everything in fiat, you would expect to make 3% per year with no risk on your investments. The fiat banking system is actually making the “rich get richer”, even though nobody would be stupid enough to complain about that.

It sounds more to me like they feel threatened by Peercoin’s potential future and are trying to downplay it without providing a real argument.

I’ve seen the second argument on here before by Btchombre. Here was the thread for those interested in reading the responses.

http://www.ppcointalk.org/index.php?topic=152.0

[quote=“Sentinelrv, post:3, topic:432”]It sounds more to me like they feel threatened by Peercoin’s potential future and are trying to downplay it without providing a real argument.

I’ve seen the second argument on here before by Btchombre. Here was the thread for those interested in reading the responses.

http://www.ppcointalk.org/index.php?topic=152.0[/quote]

Thanks for bringing the good thread up, so our discussion won’t repeat the old exchanges again and again. I just posted something I wanted to say for a while there. This topic comes up repeatedly unless it is addressed from all angles.

Both coblee and wtogami claim that xpm is centralized and imply that I could ‘shutdown’ xpm if I am forced to. It’s suspicious that whether that they are just ignorant about xpm or they are dropping that low. In xpm users must explicitly issue command to enforce checkpoint, I cannot single-handedly ‘shutdown’ the network nor force a reorganization of the block chain. The decentralization level is basically the same as bitcoin.

PPC would also gradually switch to this mode. I am quite disappointed that these supposedly respectable figures in altcoins are throwing FUD like that. Is there still anyone capable of competing fairly and squarely?

[quote=“Sunny King, post:5, topic:432”]Both coblee and wtogami claim that xpm is centralized and imply that I could ‘shutdown’ xpm if I am forced to. It’s suspicious that whether that they are just ignorant about xpm or they are dropping that low. In xpm users must explicitly issue command to enforce checkpoint, I cannot single-handedly ‘shutdown’ the network nor force a reorganization of the block chain. The decentralization level is basically the same as bitcoin.

PPC would also gradually switch to this mode. I am quite disappointed that these supposedly respectable figures in altcoins are throwing FUD like that. Is there still anyone capable of competing fairly and squarely?[/quote]

This is why we’ll do the following:

  1. Create an FAQ for both PPC/XPM addressing common “misunderstandings”
  2. Create accompanying videos once the teams are organized
  3. Create an AMA once we have the website rolling along with knowledgeable members to assist Sunny

Litecoin is on the backfoot, particularly due to LTC-Global shutting down not long ago. It’s probably part of a rallying strategy to try and raise the standing of Litecoin amongst the competing altcoins.

Compete with innovations and advanced features! not some rootless accusations! Shame for them.

coblee posted questions on reddit thread:

Sunny, sorry if I was misinformed. So, is the checkpoints opt-in? Do you know what percent of the network has opted-in? What happens if there's a 51% attack, and you send out a checkpoint that conflicts? Would there be a network split then? How would that be resolved?

Is checkpoints opt-in for ppcoin, primecoin, and feathercoin?

Note the reddit repost of my weekly update was not from me, my reddit account for some reason doesn’t work. So I’ll just reply here for reference.

Currently only xpm checkpoint is opt-in by users. By default the client only watches the checkpoint broadcast but not enforcing them. I don’t think anyone turned on the enforcement because no checkpoint has been broadcasted yet. The feature is intended for 51% emergencies so it may very well not get used.

The response policy wrt 51% attack is roughly like this. For single occurrence 51% attack, whether it would be used would involve some community inputs, because without exchange and mining pool concensus it could cause network fork. It really depends on the depth of reorganization and the damage amount. Typically it likely would not be used with single occurrence 51% attack, but instead intended to thwart sustained 51% attack, especially the 51% denial-of-service on the block chain.

ppc currently enforces checkpoint in client but would gradually transition toward xpm’s model, which means ppc would become as decentralized as xpm in the future.

feathercoin uses xpm’s checkpoint system but they decided to switch the default to enforce checkpoint, while users can still opt-out via a command or configuration parameter. So in this sense feathercoin does operate in a somewhat centralized fashion currently, which is understandable as they have been subjected to multiple 51% attacks this year.

Sunny, I let coblee know you responded to him here. Also, can you not log into Reddit, or are your posts not showing up? The latter was happening to me for a while. I was getting caught in Reddit’s spam filter. If you keep trying though, it will eventually learn you’re not a spammer. If that’s the case, just keep trying.