News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Proof of stake is incapable of producing a consensus by arcticbull on Sunday November 28, 2021 @04:38AM (#29367549)
The fork-wars of old will never happen again, IMO, on any chain of significance. These days, fork winners will be decided by the stablecoin operations they host. If ETH forks, for instance, hash power will follow whichever chain Jeremy Allaire deems the winner.
Re:Proof of stake is incapable of producing a consensus by Avshalom on Sunday November 28, 2021 @05:36AM (#29367827)
So literally one guy has control of Ethereum?
Re:Proof of stake is incapable of producing a consensus by inter_netuser on Sunday November 28, 2021 @05:59AM (#29367937)
and every other PoS chain that relies on USDC and major exchanges.

So probably more than 1 guy. maybe 5-10.

Re:Proof of stake is incapable of producing a consensus by oblio on Sunday November 28, 2021 @09:50AM (#29369316)
And how is that better than a government?
Re:Proof of stake is incapable of producing a consensus by rufusroflpunch on Sunday November 28, 2021 @11:22AM (#29370107)
It’s not. There is a huge gulf between Bitcoin and the rest of the crypto space. Bitcoin is certifiably decentralized hard money with an ossified monetary policy. I believe it is reasonable to conclude that something like Bitcoin can only happen once. The rest of crypto space isn’t really trying to be money, or is only pretending to be.
Re:Proof of stake is incapable of producing a consensus by lgvld on Sunday November 28, 2021 @12:14PM (#29370666)
& what about Monero?
Re:Proof of stake is incapable of producing a consensus by danlugo92 on Sunday November 28, 2021 @02:46PM (#29372227)
Regardless of Monero's technicals, new upcoming updates to BTC will infuse with privacy, therefore making Monero et al redundant.

BTC is also getting smart contracts soon, which makes ETH redudant as well, but it will take a while before it catches up in terms of possible complexity of the contracts.

Re:Proof of stake is incapable of producing a consensus by inter_netuser on Sunday November 28, 2021 @04:50AM (#29367622)
Do you consider nuclear energy sustainable?

It's probably not renewable (well, neither is the Sun on large enough timescale), but do you believe nuclear, either fission or fusion, will play a large role in the future?

Re:Proof of stake is incapable of producing a consensus by arcticbull on Sunday November 28, 2021 @05:04AM (#29367685)
You make it sound like I need a new hobby - which I might haha.

> Do you consider nuclear energy sustainable?

Low-carbon, yes. Sustainable, yes. Renewable, not until we productionize extraction of uranium from seawater. [1]

> ... but do you believe nuclear, either fission or fusion, will play a large role in the future?

Fusion if we can crack it, totally. Seems like a clear winner. Fission probably will if there's some political will behind it, but not unless there's a change in sentiment.

[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2016/03/24/is-nuclea...

Re:Proof of stake is incapable of producing a consensus by tomp on Sunday November 28, 2021 @12:31PM (#29370846)
This article is complete FUD.

> of which the following sources are considered to be renewable

in other words, it attempts to define the world "renewable" along favoured political ideologies.

From Wikipedia:

> Advances in breeder reactor technology could allow the current reserves of uranium to provide power for humanity for billions of years, thus making nuclear power a sustainable energy

TL;DR: nuclear is just as renewable as solar (beyond any likely duration of the human civilisation).

Re:Proof of stake is incapable of producing a consensus by arcticbull on Sunday November 28, 2021 @07:32PM (#29374892)
I saw the renewability as more of a thought exercise, because I agree with you, there's more than enough nuclear feedstock to keep us going indefinitely.