https://forum.litecoin.net/index.php/topic,7142.msg54677.html#msg54677
Just posting for general info, discussion, and counterpoints.
Reddit post.
I’m not sure about the difficulty of removing checkpointing, but why are they still using that rich get richer argument? They should address Sunny’s response to it and not say the same thing over and over again.
JustaBitofTime: The main thing I want to see Sunny address in detail is the accusation that proof of stake is setup like central banking, where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Certain people have problems with the fact that those who own the most coins will get the most newly minted coins.
Sunny King: For argument’s sake let’s assume that proof-of-stake minting is free from the risk of hacked wallet. So the argument boils down to whether holding the currency should deserve some compensation. It’s a similar debate to whether some interest on money is deserved. From my point of view I think interest by itself is not the problem, who wants to lend money without interest? As a free market phenomenon I think interest has some legitimate roots, so it’s very much separate from central banking, which is an entirely different animal based on statism ideologies.
The proof-of-stake minting provides a service to the ppc network, so why shouldn’t those who provide the service receive some compensation? The rich and the poor are treated the same here, both can provide proof-of-stake minting, and rate of income is proportional to their holding. So you can say that the rich get richer, and the poor also get richer, at the same rate, so long as they both try to provide the service to the community. Meanwhile, those who transact in the network with high velocity pay the security cost via low inflation.
“It seems the market has largely rejected PPC for this reason.” - Warren
Remind me again, where was LTC in April? Oh yeah, less than PPC. It’s okay Warren, at a 15.6 million dollar cap, we’re just getting started.
[quote=“JustaBitofTime, post:3, topic:763”]“It seems the market has largely rejected PPC for this reason.” - Warren
Remind me again, where was LTC in April? Oh yeah, less than PPC. It’s okay Warren, at a 15.6 million dollar cap, we’re just getting started.[/quote]
He’s also wrong about this. JohnnyLatte posted this on Reddit…
Certain people have problems with the fact that those who own the most coins will get the most newly minted coins.
People seem to believe that crypto currencies are an egalitarian dream. I’d like Warren to explain to me how his current stake of LTC (which, I’m sure, isn’t inconsequential given his time involved with the currency) isn’t unfair to people like me, who don’t have a good setup for srcypt, and thus, aren’t carrying multi-thousand coin balances. I mean, when LTC goes up, his net worth goes up, right? The rich get richer…
On the flip side, if you’ve got a lot of PPC stashed away, you’ll make more coins on your PoS minting, no doubt. But unless there’s a hidden mechanism in the code that says “if PPC_count > 10000 { proof_stake * 0.02 } else proof_stake * 0.01”, you’re getting the same return on your coins as the guy with 100x your net worth.
This may be fatalistic, but in my view the rich with ALWAYS get richer, because that’s the benefit of being able to position your assets to give you the best return. With that being said, Peercoin’s proof of stake mechanism, at least to me, is a major improvement over banking systems today, given that you’re guaranteed to see a return on coins held – try getting a guaranteed anything with the banking system as it stands.