A Proof-Of-Work algorithm requires miners to do a certain amount of work that is compute-intensive to gain access to a service or the right to do something. This algorithm, by design, also requires that the work done shall not ...
"Blockchain technology is energy-intensive..." => No, it doesn't have to be.
Let's look at Proof-Of-Stake, an alternative to the energy-intensive Proof-Of-Work algorithm.
🧵🔽
A Proof-Of-Work algorithm requires miners to do a certain amount of work that is compute-intensive to gain access to a service or the right to do something. This algorithm, by design, also requires that the work done shall not ...
https://t.co/VGzmmbMisE
Proof-Of-Work is the name of a cryptographic algorithm that is used for some blockchains when new blocks are to be appended to the chain.
— Oliver Jumpertz (@oliverjumpertz) April 3, 2021
Let's take a higher-level look at how this one works, shall we?
\U0001f9f5\U0001f53d
Proof-Of-Stake is another algorithm, designed to create distributed consensus on a blockchain while being less energy-intensive and more scalable than Proof-Of-Work.
While having the same goal as Proof-Of-Work, distributed consensus, the process is completely different.
A Blockchain that uses Proof-Of-Stake chooses a node to create and append the next block randomly. This process of appending a new block to the chain is usually called "forging" and not "mining".
Whenever a node is chosen to forge a new block, the stake's age is reset to zero to distribute forging among all nodes ...
There are many other factors that can be taken into account and they are usually as individual as the blockchain using Proof-Of-Stake. Taking a look at the specific blockchain's whitepaper usually helps you to decide whether the chain is legit ...
When chosen, a forging node checks whether all transactions for the next block are valid. It then signs the block and appends it to the chain.
Well, we are at the end of this thread, and I hope you now understand Proof-Of-Stake, the alternative to the energy-intensive Proof-Of-Work a little better.
More from Crypto
Excited to share our 2020 #Bitcoin review.
2020 will be remembered as the year the long fabled institutions finally arrived and #Bitcoin became a bonafide macroeconomic asset.
Below are the top highlights of each month for Bitcoin’s historic year.
1/
Bitcoin is now at all-time highs capping off an extremely successful year.
But it was by no means stable ride up.
2020 was a historically volatile year.
@YoungCryptoPM and I provided a detailed overview of every month of 2020 in all its
Jan.
3 days into the new year the US assassinated Iran’s top general Soleimani.
BTC surprisingly reacted to the events behaving like a safe haven as the risk of war increased.
The events provided the first hints of BTC potentially having graduated to a legitimate macro asset.
Feb.
COVID-19 reached a tipping point causing markets to crash.
BTC’s correlation with the S&P 500 reached an ATH in the following weeks.
This is when everyone learned BTC was not a recession hedge, it was a hedge against inflation and loss of confidence in fiat currencies. https://t.co/JB7dJ3qp6M
Mar.
Financial markets in free fall.
The liquidity crisis was so severe BTC experienced one of it’s worst days ever.
Now known as Black Thursday, on March 12, BTC plummeted as much as 50% to below $4,000 at its lowest point on the day.
BTC closed the day down 40%
2020 will be remembered as the year the long fabled institutions finally arrived and #Bitcoin became a bonafide macroeconomic asset.
Below are the top highlights of each month for Bitcoin’s historic year.
1/
Bitcoin is now at all-time highs capping off an extremely successful year.
But it was by no means stable ride up.
2020 was a historically volatile year.
@YoungCryptoPM and I provided a detailed overview of every month of 2020 in all its
Jan.
3 days into the new year the US assassinated Iran’s top general Soleimani.
BTC surprisingly reacted to the events behaving like a safe haven as the risk of war increased.
The events provided the first hints of BTC potentially having graduated to a legitimate macro asset.
Feb.
COVID-19 reached a tipping point causing markets to crash.
BTC’s correlation with the S&P 500 reached an ATH in the following weeks.
This is when everyone learned BTC was not a recession hedge, it was a hedge against inflation and loss of confidence in fiat currencies. https://t.co/JB7dJ3qp6M
1/ Figure I should get out ahead of this issue:
— Dan McArdle (@robustus) June 22, 2018
Bitcoin is a hedge against inflation & loss of confidence in fiat, NOT a hedge against a typical recession.
Mar.
Financial markets in free fall.
The liquidity crisis was so severe BTC experienced one of it’s worst days ever.
Now known as Black Thursday, on March 12, BTC plummeted as much as 50% to below $4,000 at its lowest point on the day.
BTC closed the day down 40%
I've just read one of the most lucid, wide-ranging, cross-disciplinary critiques of cryptocurrency and blockchain I've yet to encounter. 1/
It comes from David "DSHR" Rosenthal, a distinguished technologist whose past achievements including helping to develop X11 and the core technologies for Nvidia.
https://t.co/tkAMShno4k 2/
Rosenthal's critique is a transcript of a lecture he gave to Stanford's EE380 class, adapted from a December 2021 talk for an investor conference. 3/
It is a bang-up-to-date synthesis of many of the critical writings on the subject, glued together with Rosenthal's own deep technical expertise. He calls it "Can We Mitigate Cryptocurrencies' Externalities?"
The presence of "externalities" in Rosenthal's title is key. 4/
Rosenthal identifies blockchainism's core ideology as emerging from "the libertarian culture of Silicon Valley and the cypherpunks," and states that "libertarianism's attraction is based on ignoring externalities."
This is an important critique of libertarianism. 5/
It comes from David "DSHR" Rosenthal, a distinguished technologist whose past achievements including helping to develop X11 and the core technologies for Nvidia.
https://t.co/tkAMShno4k 2/
Rosenthal's critique is a transcript of a lecture he gave to Stanford's EE380 class, adapted from a December 2021 talk for an investor conference. 3/
It is a bang-up-to-date synthesis of many of the critical writings on the subject, glued together with Rosenthal's own deep technical expertise. He calls it "Can We Mitigate Cryptocurrencies' Externalities?"
The presence of "externalities" in Rosenthal's title is key. 4/
Rosenthal identifies blockchainism's core ideology as emerging from "the libertarian culture of Silicon Valley and the cypherpunks," and states that "libertarianism's attraction is based on ignoring externalities."
This is an important critique of libertarianism. 5/
You May Also Like
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
A brief analysis and comparison of the CSS for Twitter's PWA vs Twitter's legacy desktop website. The difference is dramatic and I'll touch on some reasons why.
Legacy site *downloads* ~630 KB CSS per theme and writing direction.
6,769 rules
9,252 selectors
16.7k declarations
3,370 unique declarations
44 media queries
36 unique colors
50 unique background colors
46 unique font sizes
39 unique z-indices
https://t.co/qyl4Bt1i5x
PWA *incrementally generates* ~30 KB CSS that handles all themes and writing directions.
735 rules
740 selectors
757 declarations
730 unique declarations
0 media queries
11 unique colors
32 unique background colors
15 unique font sizes
7 unique z-indices
https://t.co/w7oNG5KUkJ
The legacy site's CSS is what happens when hundreds of people directly write CSS over many years. Specificity wars, redundancy, a house of cards that can't be fixed. The result is extremely inefficient and error-prone styling that punishes users and developers.
The PWA's CSS is generated on-demand by a JS framework that manages styles and outputs "atomic CSS". The framework can enforce strict constraints and perform optimisations, which is why the CSS is so much smaller and safer. Style conflicts and unbounded CSS growth are avoided.
Legacy site *downloads* ~630 KB CSS per theme and writing direction.
6,769 rules
9,252 selectors
16.7k declarations
3,370 unique declarations
44 media queries
36 unique colors
50 unique background colors
46 unique font sizes
39 unique z-indices
https://t.co/qyl4Bt1i5x
PWA *incrementally generates* ~30 KB CSS that handles all themes and writing directions.
735 rules
740 selectors
757 declarations
730 unique declarations
0 media queries
11 unique colors
32 unique background colors
15 unique font sizes
7 unique z-indices
https://t.co/w7oNG5KUkJ
The legacy site's CSS is what happens when hundreds of people directly write CSS over many years. Specificity wars, redundancy, a house of cards that can't be fixed. The result is extremely inefficient and error-prone styling that punishes users and developers.
The PWA's CSS is generated on-demand by a JS framework that manages styles and outputs "atomic CSS". The framework can enforce strict constraints and perform optimisations, which is why the CSS is so much smaller and safer. Style conflicts and unbounded CSS growth are avoided.
