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
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
