Going off on Breitman’s thoughts, Cornell Professor Emin Gün Sirer weighed in on the question as well. In his view, what makes PoS superior is that it “keeps value within the system.” PoW systems, on the other hand, leaks this same value to miners and those that control their power.
An important difference between PoW and PoS is that, in the former, transaction fees accrue to the hashpower of the network, with no corresponding reduction in inflation, whereas in the latter it acrues to stakers, which effectively lowers real inflation.— Arthur B. 🌮 (@ArthurB) September 15, 2019
Still, though, the point has to be made that this is only true to an extent. Bitcoin has a defined limit of coins which it can ever have in circulation. Ethereum, which aspires to someday be a proof-of-stake system, does not have any hard cap and could virtually continue to create ETH indefinitely. How this will impact each network’s internal economy is still difficult to assess given that it’s largely hypothetical. Since there has not been a truly successful network on a PoS consensus model yet, this question will likely continue to split the cryptocurrency industry for some time. Where do you stand on this issue? What advantages does a PoW consensus model have over PoS or vice-versa? Let us know your thoughts below.
Indeed, well-designed PoS systems keep value within the system. PoW leaks it out to the miners and the power companies. https://t.co/WZCcXCyZZw— Emin Gün Sirer (@el33th4xor) September 16, 2019
Images are courtesy of Twitter, Shutterstock.
All the information contained on our website is published in good faith and for general information purposes only. Any action the reader takes upon the information found on our website is strictly at their own risk.