polynya
@polynya
PoW (or PoS) are useful for forming a status quo. But beyond that certain point, due to economies/entrenchment of scale & lack of redistributive mechanisms, they will likely only centralize things further. When the time comes, replacing them with a better mechanism will be essential for minimizing centralization.
9 replies
37 recasts
133 reactions
Naomi
@naomiii
https://arxiv.org/abs/1904.02368 to this day the best source to reference whenever some BTC maxi comes and tells me that the intial decentralization was a guarantee things would stay that way.
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
Millie
@millie-x
What are your thoughts on Justin Drake’s views on one shot signatures to solve double spends?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
cryptocellaris.eth 🎩
@cryptocellaris
Do you think there is a better mechanism already that hasn't seen wide adoption or is a superior alternative yet to be invented?
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Max Andrew
@maxandrew
BTC is stuck with PoW because mining interests got too powerful. Ethereum’s PoW is the leading protocols increasingly openly copying the big tech playbook of acquisitions, lobbying, and copying
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Kiwidog4
@kiwidog
Any redistribution mechanism would need to be anti-sybil and anti-large actor. A combo we've yet to find a (non-centralized) solution for. Right? I feel like if we solve this, we improve so many areas (Airdrops, governance, wealth concentration and etc). What solutions are you looking at? Zk?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
ucung
@ucung
Game-changer for decentralization!
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dusman
@dusman
Status quo is comfy, but centralization's a trap 🚫
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Blockboy
@0xblockboy.eth
Maybe social proof is the ultimate decentralizing mechanism
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
dongaihua
@dongai
1 $DEGEN
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
