[mule1]

Agreed but for a slightly different reason. PoW vs PoS is a much more nuanced debate for reasons other than the environmental impact talked about in mainstream circles.

Bitcoin is PoW for many reasons, a fork of bitcoin could switch it to PoS and end the discussion, but its decentralized nature where one hash = one vote is part of the core of its economic policy.

Ethereum and other PoS chains take trade off but advantages from utilizing PoS one that it desires to be a blockchain that can settle contracts on its layer 1.

This Portman-Warner amendment favors PoW chains dissuading competition between the two.

[Taek]

Portman-Warner is not just favoring PoW over PoS, it's favoring PoW over ALL alternatives. It completely shuts down all potential for new solutions to gain adoption in the United States.

Even if you don't like PoS, you still shouldn't like the Portman-Warner amendment.

[dcolkitt]

Agreed. There are many subtle and complex trade offs that come between PoW, PoS, and alternative consensus mechanisms. But one thing I can say with confidence is that Rob Portman is in no way qualified to understand, let alone make those decisions.

[alfiedotwtf]

Then make the very first block PoW, which switches to PoS from there after. I'm sure the bill hasn't been written to take into account any duration and so is merely a binary question.

[mule1]

Agreed