š
Original date posted:2017-04-06
š Original message:On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 11:11:53PM -0400, Erik Aronesty wrote:
> If the primary purpose of pow is to destroy value, then a masked proof of
> burn to an expanded address that assigns the private key holder the right
You're talking about proof-of-stake here.
At best it's very difficult for such a "proof-of-burn" to _actually_ be a
proof, as the burn only happens if the consensus mechanism ultimately includes
that burn. Contrast that to proof-of-work's incredibly simple proof: you _know_
energy was destroyed to find a PoW solution, regardless of what consensus is
ultimately reached.
It's the difference between a computer secured from hackers with an anti-virus
scanner, and a computer secured by the fact that it's not connected to the
internet at all.
--
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170405/6a415f35/attachment.sig>;
Peter Todd [ARCHIVE] /
npub1m2ā¦a2np2
2023-06-07 17:59:18
in reply to nevent1qā¦q69d
Author Public Key
npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2Published at
2023-06-07 17:59:18Event JSON
{
"id": "5e7bad8af1cf711980c84747e5357cbad44a03bde429e8383e92ce25af2308f4",
"pubkey": "daa2fc676a25e3b5b45644540bcbd1e1168b111427cd0e3cf19c56194fb231aa",
"created_at": 1686160758,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"ad36e2a7543163ffef3218fa3d55149ec67fbe14dd109a89d2940c12712bdc10",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"3fd7ab7a0e2b4e3d3cb95424d9e6df11ad625254478413e00bb11645ab69c41a",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"22944ce1e29904e3826d25013a614e4665693ec514003efacc1b7586e8e5d0aa"
]
],
"content": "š
Original date posted:2017-04-06\nš Original message:On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 11:11:53PM -0400, Erik Aronesty wrote:\n\u003e If the primary purpose of pow is to destroy value, then a masked proof of\n\u003e burn to an expanded address that assigns the private key holder the right\n\nYou're talking about proof-of-stake here.\n\nAt best it's very difficult for such a \"proof-of-burn\" to _actually_ be a\nproof, as the burn only happens if the consensus mechanism ultimately includes\nthat burn. Contrast that to proof-of-work's incredibly simple proof: you _know_\nenergy was destroyed to find a PoW solution, regardless of what consensus is\nultimately reached.\n\nIt's the difference between a computer secured from hackers with an anti-virus\nscanner, and a computer secured by the fact that it's not connected to the\ninternet at all.\n\n-- \nhttps://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 455 bytes\nDesc: Digital signature\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170405/6a415f35/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "16d92301ea5ba2124c553ea212d0255d5b0b2d402b49ecde2c01fc7edbc4fa7ba0e1bb606fea22e79190b09e96a1dfa165f430334c6080bbb77d4aaaf9b66996"
}