Chris Larsen, the co-founder of Ripple Labs, can choose to use Proof of Work (PoW) Bitcoin and encrypted networks. Larsen’s latest article explains that due to the environmental impact, the encryption industry needs to rethink PoW. The Bellows executive believes that while other types of consensus algorithms “consume only a small amount of energy”, they are also very effective in ensuring safety.
The co-founder of Ripple believes that encrypted networks using proof of work should consider alternatives
Although the global economy is in trouble after a year of Covid-19 closures and business closures, many people are very interested in climate change. Ripple Labs co-founder Chris Larsen wrote a blog post about the environment and why the cryptocurrency industry should reconsider using PoW. Larsen believes that if the verification model of the Bitcoin (BTC) network is not resolved, then at some point, it will lose to the crypto asset network that can do this.
Larsen’s blog post said: “As more and more individual investors and companies occupy important Bitcoin positions, and as the world strives to avoid climate disasters, PoW will move to an intolerable social level.” Ripple co-founder pointed out , Bitcoin network participants have been committed to renewable energy and green fuels, but Larsen emphasized that this is only “part of the solution.”
For Larsen, the consensus algorithm using Proof of Stake (PoS) “has been proven to effectively ensure storage value while using only a small amount of energy.” He understands that consensus algorithms are essential for verifying transactions and keeping the blockchain secure. important.
Larson said that the cryptocurrency industry has had a decade to review these alternatives, and also pointed out that many PoS and non-PoW coins already account for more than 43% of the entire market value.
“Today, in terms of market value, non-PoW-based coins (including the expected conversion of Ethereum) account for 43% of all cryptocurrencies, and most of the new cryptocurrencies introduced today choose to avoid PoW. It is clear which direction the trend is heading. Development,” Larsen explained.
Ripple executives added:
The XRP ledger has used federal consensus to verify transactions and protect its public ledger for nearly 9 years. It has closed 62+ million ledgers, has no downtime, uses only the energy of 50 American households each year, and has achieved carbon neutrality.
A large number of studies claim that the security strength of PoW is better than joint and PoS systems
Larsen’s blog post comprehensively introduces all the negative factors involved in the PoW consensus algorithm. However, the blog post did not have a negative debate on the security and vulnerabilities related to PoS and non-PoW tokens. In the past ten years, numerous papers and studies have shown that PoS algorithms are not as secure as PoW. For example, compared to networks like BTC, Ripple’s joint consensus or any type of joint blockchain mechanism is considered centralized.
For example, Nikhil Mehta, a blockchain and financial technology lawyer at Smithammandsen LLC, said that he cited Ripple’s issues with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) because the regulator considers XRP to be a centralized security.
Mr. Mehta emphasized in the paper: “The US Securities and Exchange Commission has stated that due to their decentralized nature, Bitcoin and Ethereum are not securities. This is a sign of blockchain applications.” He added: “Another On the other hand, the US Securities and Exchange Commission has a different view of Ripple. The US Securities and Exchange Commission believes that Ripple’s development and issuance are conducted by Ripple in a centralized manner.
In addition, Larsen’s paper does not mention the PoS coin network that has been attacked multiple times in the past decade. One example is how Tron’s Steemit acquisition exposed loopholes in the entrusted proof-of-stake network. PoW and PoS systems have different attack costs. A paper pointed out that the attack cost of the PoS protocol can be reduced to zero.
The paper emphasized: “In fact, if the attacker’s motivation is sufficiently large (this is common sense), he will get a successful attack for free.”
Ripple’s Chris Larsen pointed out in his paper that he would not consider the PoW model to be outdated, but perhaps these types of networks should be combined with those that provide low-energy/low-carbon verification systems separate.
“We should see the essence of PoW-a well-designed technology that has become obsolete in today’s world,” Larsen’s blog post details. “This by no means means that Bitcoin and other PoW cryptocurrencies themselves are obsolete. Their widespread adoption is self-evident. But they need to distinguish themselves from earlier technologies that cannot meet today’s climate needs and adopt low-energy Energy-consuming/low-carbon alternatives to ensure its books.” The executive added.
A large number of papers hit Bitcoin’s energy use
There are countless papers, studies, and complaints about the energy use of PoW. Many of these are often highlighted in the exciting crypto bull market in 2021. However, most of these arguments have been debunked. Only recently has a Bitcoin miner claimed that “Bitcoin is one of the most environmentally friendly financial networks.”
Moreover, academic papers involving Satoshi Nakamoto’s proof-of-work system rarely find security vulnerabilities, attacks or vulnerabilities. Despite this, Larson still believes that energy issues may become the Achilles heel of the Bitcoin network in the future.
Larson said: “I think such a change is essential to maintaining the world’s dominant cryptocurrency.” Ripple Labs executive said: “PoW’s current energy demand and carbon footprint are already unsustainably high, only Bitcoin every year It consumes an average of 132 TWh (equivalent to approximately 12 million American households) and releases approximately 63 million tons of carbon dioxide each year.” The paper concludes.
What do you think of Chris Larsen’s view on PoW networks like Bitcoin and reconsidering PoW consensus? Let us know your thoughts on this topic in the comments section below.
Tags in this story
Bitcoin, Bitcoin (BTC), Blockchain, Carbon, Chris Larson, Consensus, Energy, Energy Consumption, Ethereum, Union, Low Carbon Network, Low Energy Network, Nikhil Mehta, Thesis, PoS, PoW , Proof of work, proof of Stake, Ripple, Ripple co-founder, Ripple’s Chris Larsen, SEC, research, XRP, XRP design
Picture Credits: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons
Disclaimer: This article is for reference only. It is not a direct offer or solicitation of an offer, nor is it a recommendation or endorsement of any product, service or company. Bitcoin.com does not provide investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. The company or the author shall not bear any direct or indirect responsibility for any damage or loss caused or allegedly caused by using or relying on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article or related thereto.