[gtrubetskoy]

> Proof of stake is meant to consume less resources but then the power is then handed to people with the most money?

I'm surprised nobody has caught on to the fact that the present fiat system is in essence a Proof-of-Stake one.

> Coming up with a way to have a decentralised currency where everyone involved gets a fair say without consuming too many resources is a super interesting problem.

Indeed. I almost wonder if it can be proven that thermodynamics is in fact the only possible way to verifiably make something take considerable time and energy, i.e. actually cost in resources that we have no way of faking, especially time.

[seanwilson]

> I'm surprised nobody has caught on to the fact that the present fiat system is in essence a Proof-of-Stake one.

That was what I was meaning really. If the people that have large amounts of money (whether that's in owning coins with proof of stake or owning hardware with proof of work/space) have a disproportionally large say in what happens it's not much of an improvement to the current systems we all live in.

[AlexandrB]

> Indeed. I almost wonder if it can be proven that thermodynamics is in fact the only possible way to verifiably make something take considerable time and energy, i.e. actually cost in resources that we have no way of faking, especially time.

This seems intuitively correct. So much so that I'm sure there's a paper that either confirms or denies that this is the case (perhaps in information theory). I also wonder how quantum computing affects this idea.

[qsucvatz]

This form of proof of work, SHA-256, has a scramble shuffle of XORs that quantum computers aren't applicable to.