[HN Gopher] Proof-of-Stake and Stablecoins: A Blockchain Central...
___________________________________________________________________
Proof-of-Stake and Stablecoins: A Blockchain Centralization Dilemma
Author : yasp
Score : 17 points
Date : 2021-11-29 21:23 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.lynalden.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.lynalden.com)
| prohobo wrote:
| Aren't stablecoins kind of pointless and dangerous?
|
| We all know that Tether is a huge scam, and it underpins like 75%
| of Bitcoin transactions - meaning if it crashes it could take
| Bitcoin with it.
|
| Adding onto that, stablecoins only really make long-term sense as
| havens for speculators and day traders. Do we really want to
| weaponize crypto markets like some kind of hyper-stock market?
| verdverm wrote:
| A CBDC (Central Bank Digital Currency) backed by a money
| market, and a hybrid public-private partnership between the
| govt and thin banks would have the stable nature of a currency
| while eliminating much of the inefficiencies in the current
| TradFi and cryptos.
| prohobo wrote:
| > while eliminating much of the inefficiencies in the current
| TradFi and cryptos.
|
| I'm not sure what your understanding of a stablecoin is, but
| I'm talking specifically about crypto stablecoins, not
| digital currencies. As you allude to in the last part of the
| quote, you're no longer talking about stablecoins.
| 0x64 wrote:
| Dai, MakerDAO's stablecoin, is over-collaterized through
| various crypto assets and there's around $6.5b worth of it in
| circulation right now.
| iskander wrote:
| >The digital blockchain, via proof-of-work, is thus connected to
| real-world natural resources.
|
| This, in essence, is why any further adoption of PoW chains is
| deeply incompatible with climate change mitigation. I'm happy to
| see crypto mature into some kind of open source / open protocol
| financial system but it needs to happen strictly on proof-of-
| stake chains (whatever the challenges to decentralization).
| verdverm wrote:
| Proof of Authority might be better than staking. There are some
| interesting winner take all like properties in both systems.
| One is easier to regulate for the broader good when things go
| awry.
| iskander wrote:
| Interesting, hadn't heard of it before. What gets slashed in
| PoA? Is there some kind of quantified reputation that you
| lose through misbehavior?
| anonporridge wrote:
| Use of energy is not necessarily incompatible with climate
| change mitigation. PoW uses electricity and is completely
| agnostic to whether that electricity is generated by fossil
| fuels or clean renewables/nuclear. Piddling about how
| civilization chooses to use electricity as a solution to
| climate change will be a never ending game of whack-a-mole. The
| only solution is to address it at it's source, by internalizing
| the negative externalizes of carbon pollution in the cost of
| this energy use. Anything else is feel good bullshit.
|
| Moreover, to the proponents of PoW, it is not a flaw to be
| removed, but a necessary foundation that makes the protocol
| incorruptible and eternally open and permissionless for anyone
| to join as first class citizens, even late adopters. This
| stands in stark contrast to PoS which gives an absurd level of
| power and protocol control to early adopters that potentially
| can't ever be diluted, and may even increase since PoS rewards
| holders of coin with even more coin.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-11-29 23:00 UTC)