Why can’t PoS scale? So kadena team claims that PoS can’t scale because sharding PoS is impossible.
Can someone explain this for a brainlet? I went on Reddit and they said that PoW is dead and that proof of work is the future.
Kadena is a scam?
Brody Barnes
Jayden Sanders
There are only 4 ways to "scale"
1. Big blocks
Terra, Polygon, BSV, Algorand come to mind, obviously not sustainable or decentralized.
2. Not using a Blockchain and using a DAG instead.
The key here is parallel transaction execution, in those Systems the DAG is bound by transaction that touch one another, which means if everyone is using uniswap the entire DAG is congested, and the worst part is you can't scale that by adding more DAG or whatever, projects like Hbar, fantom, aVAX, iota, Hathor, alepth zero, that new one using the Libra founder meme. It's all a scam. Using DAGs to scam retards has been going on for a while, look at nano. There is a reason why DAGs aren't used in high frequency trading and finance in general.
3. Layer 2
read 4. Sharding
The holy grail, always adding more shards, keeping security and decentralization while scaling without limit.
This happens to be only possible via PoW and it seems like only Kadena has such a system working. There are projects that claim to do the same but fall apart on further examination, hamonry has one working shard, elrond is a meme, near is a DAG, this is because Sharding PoS is fundamentally impossible without centralizing or some form of Main chain, which turns all the shards into L2, I.e. they settle to the main chain therefore congesting it and driving fees up, and adding more shards degrades Security.
That's basically it also fuck you for baiting me into your shitty thread I have stuff to do
Evan Harris
>This happens to be only possible via PoW
Why? Nobody has explained this part yet.
You can scale PoS with L2s. Isn’t that what eth 2.0 is?
Adam Gutierrez
Because true layer one Sharding is not possible with out an objective work function. A multi-chain (chainweb) arch doesn't work for POS because the validation of a peer chain is subjective to the state of the peer chain. This implies that all replicators must replicate all chains as the security isn't captured by the headers alone.
It's a subtle point but an important one -- because POW is objective, the decentralized security found by replicating one chain + the header stream for the network is the same as replicating the whole network. This isn't to say that someone wont try to apply POS to chainweb, just that it will be very fragile without augmentation because the bribery issue and nothing at stake problems get magnified as chain-count increases. One solution to this to have one chain where everyone stakes to, and use those positions to determine validators for peer chains. If you iterate through that solution idea, you end up at hub-and-spoke ala cosmos, which has the liquidity problem that comes with all layer-2 solutions (you have to de-stake from one peer/spoke, settle to hub, then re-stake to new spoke, to transmit funds... and the hub is low bandwidth so that de-stake is expensive). The other solution is to have the multiplexing of executions take place post consensus, which is effectively Hashgraph or Solana. These approaches have the fundamental issue in that, Ahmdal's Law + small world problem basically limit the overall parallelized network throughput to 6x sequential (10x max).
Bentley Baker
You forgot the better one,
5. Radix, can scale the unscalable
Kayden Johnson
Radix is a DHT (meaning point 2. not a Blockchain), thinking that a DHT can scale is flat earth tier delusion. Anyway see you in 2023
Elijah Brooks
Okay that’s cool but it still it still doesn’t have cross shard atomic composability
Dylan Collins
8 years of vaporware. Look forward to 9.
Julian Cox
Yes, and nothing that scales does have that.
I can't atomically transact a tx from Eth to Maric.
It's not needed anyway so why bother.
David Kelly
Does this mean Chainlink is pretty much fucking useless besides it's meme power?
Asher Reyes
No chainlink is very useful, it's not perfect but the only oracle worth using. Kadena is not competition to an oracle service, in fact, a scalable L1 can catapult defi and therefore chainlink into a multi trillion dollar industry.
Jeremiah Garcia
>only oracle worth using
Wyatt Murphy
Post your favorite oracle alongside your favorite anime.
Wyatt Wright
oh boy this thread format again, how many times are we going to do this OP
Nathan Wright
>Kadena is a scam?
yes
Landon Reed
rema
Nicholas James
Nah Kadena will still need oracles. The CCIP thing is another story though
>You will be automatically routed to the cheapest chain
But at scale, with significant adoption, the only chain that remains cheap is Kadena.
So pretty much everything but KDA and LINK is useless.
Liam Williams
What's your point?
Owen Rivera
Kadena is wrong, PoS can scale. Living examples are literally there. Algorand scales a lot, Fantom scales a lot, Avalanche scales well...
Carson Sullivan
It can't scale. It's running at max limit.
Jeremiah Barnes
That show was great
>>You will be automatically routed to the cheapest chain
>But at scale, with significant adoption, the only chain that remains cheap is Kadena.
This, CCIP is useless in the future, why even bother, I mean the people there are smart, they should have just looked into kda + the market and realized, "yeah okay fuck this let's focus on building on chainweb"
Algorand and fantom have 50-100 validators, they are centralized, also algo scales via big blocks.