Understanding Proof Stake (POS)


At present, the major issues cryptocurrencies are facing are how to decentralize properly as well as achieve objective consensus. Generally, the major aim of a consensus is to ensure that a state can update safely in line with certain transition guidelines, where the legal authority to carry out such state transitions belongs to a specific economic group. The economic group is a collection of users that have the legal backing to carry out transitions through a few algorithms. Also, the economic set utilized for the transitions must have the feature of being safely decentralized, and this means that a single individual or group of individuals can take absolute control of the set, no matter the financial power of the individual or group.

Decentralization of the consensus group

Even though cryptocurrencies was created with the aim of spreading the regulation of specific currency, there have been concerns over if the use of Proof-of-Work (PoW) as its major mode of functioning can help it achieve its aim.

To confirm a block, Bitcoin utilizes a Proof of work consensus technique.

There are various reasons why the main reason for designing Bitcoin has been compromised:

Proof-of-work mining, usually called PoW mining, has to do with using a system’s hardware and resources to carry out actions over a network and build the block which are the ingredients of the network’s blockchain. As a result, you will get a hashrate incentive that is almost proportional to the hashrate of your miner as well as the total hashrate of the network.
PoW takes place when miners are attempting to find solutions to very complex math problems. Solving a problem is more or less guesswork; however, assessing if a solution is right is simple. Miners cannot take advantage of the system since it requires real-world equipments, since it cannot be achieved with Bayes’ Theorem and the principles of Thermodynamics to show that a block does need a certain quantity of work to be mined. In this manner, users may just choose the longest valid chain that has the most quantity of work as the right chain.


  • The capacity to mine altogether depends on power expenses as well as the geographical area of mining gear.
  • The uneven dispersion of assets along with economies of scale has an effect on the consensus and is confirmed by mining rewards.
  • Present block hash problems makes it impossible for private customers to mine except they engage in mining pools(and this results in centralization)


What is Proof of stake

The objectives of Proof-of-stake (PoS) is a different way of achieving consensus in a distributed blockchain system. Instead of looking for Proof of work, the node that creates a block must show that it already have access to certain amount of coins prior to the network accepting this node. Creating a block has to do with transferring coins to oneself, so as to show ownership. The quantity of coins needed (which is also referred to as target) is outlined by the network via a difficulty adjustment process that is the same as PoW.

Similar to PoW, the process of creating a block is compensated via transaction fees and a supply structure outlines by the underlying protocol. Proof of Stake does not have to do with mining, but deals with validating a network. It takes place when a miner establish a stake or puts a specific amount of their coins, with the aim of verifying a block of transactions. Every validator has a part in the network.

A stake that is bonded refers to a situation where one keeps the coins in a system and can use it as collateral in validating a block.

The cryptographic equations in PoS are far easier for computers to find solutions and are fairer than PoW; this is because anybody can be a miner. What is needed is just to show that you are the owner of a specific amount of coins in an underlying currency. For instance, if you have 2% of every BOON coin, you can mine 2% of every transactions that takes place in the BOON Coin. In PoW you a chain is valid because lot of effort is put behind creating it, whereas in PoS highest collateral establish the trust.

How it works

Nodes within the network do not expend time and power to handle mathematical problems to achieve a consensus; rather, they stake on the blocks. If a block is part of the chain, then anybody that made a bet on it will get compensated.

With this technique, all nodes stakes on its block. The nodes with blocks that has no suspicious transactions and is part of the chain is rewarded. On the other hand, the nodes that have fraudulent blocks will be punished and the amount of money they put on the bet will be deducted from their balance.

No need of fast computers or constant electricity to place bets, all that a node requires to be qualified for rewards is a certain amount that it can use to place a bet. This is based on the premise that anybody who has the largest stake in the blockchain is the leader.

PeerCoin was the initial PoS dependent currency. They transformed into a POS while it was still a POW mining coin. More advancements in the PeerCoin PoS protocol resulted in the creation of NovaCoin which utilizes a hybrid PoS / PoW system. The first crypto currency to utilize a complete PoS dependent system that was influenced by the aforementioned projects is BlackCoin.


Apart from the standout benefit of PoS over PoW as a technique utilized to create consensus within the network, it has inherent constraints which are still present and if solved will vastly enhance network security.

Coin Age

In the PeerCoin or POS system,  creation of blocks according to coin age which is a an element that enhance the weight of unspent coins linearly as time goes on; the evidence that must be shown together with a new block and must obey the condition below:

Coin Age In the PeerCoin protocol block generation is based on coin age which is a factor that increases the weight of unspent coins linearly over time; the proof that has to be provided together with a new block and has to satisfy the following condition:

proofhash < coins.age | {X } coin age ·target

The proof hash is similar to that of an obfuscation total which is dependent on the bet modifier, the sum that was not spent, as well as the present time.

With this framework it is workable for an assailant to set aside enough coin age to wind up as the node with the most noteworthy weight on the system.

Suppose if there is an attack and assuming that the assault was to be malicious the assailant would then be able to restrict the blockchain and carry out double-spend. Following this, a secondary two-fold-spend will need the assailant to set aside coin age once more, because the stake resets as the block is being created.

Please note that, this type of attack is very unlikely and that the reward is questionable. This is because sufficiently saving coin age to be the most elevated weight on the system would either take a considerable amount of time or a ton of coins, and consequently cash, to get this going. Also, carrying out such an assault would most likely downgrade the framework itself, so it would not be beneficial for the attacker in the long run)

Another issue with coin age is selfish, but honest nodes. These are nodes without any harmful plan yet they hold their coins out of the system and just stake from time to time to ensure they continue getting stake rewards. The present framework actually incentives this type of conduct by keeping their nodes disconnected until the point that it collects enough coin age that will enable it collect the reward in a brief time frame and after that close down the node once more.

Removing Coin Age from the equation

The safest method of carrying out a Proof of Stake network is to have maximum amount of nodes live as possible. This is because if the nodes are more, then the possibility of the network being breached is like 51%, and the real network that will carry out these transactions via these nodes will also be faster.

Therefore, removing the coin age needs every node to be connected if they are to get their stake remunerated. Setting aside coin age is not achievable with the new framework that figures the probability of staking as proofhash < coins • target.  

51% Attack

A 51% attack is the point at which a miner, or probably a mining pool, regulates 51% of the system’s computational ability. With such a capacity, they can nullify legal exchanges and double spent cash. They’d accomplish this by making and affirming their own fraudulent blocks, and do it so rapidly, whatever is left of the mining group making valid blocks would have their legal work refuted.

That is how the PoS can be of assistance. Regardless of the possibility that somebody possessed 51% of digital funds, it would not be to their greatest advantage to assault something that they have a greater share. Additionally, it’s far-fetched that anybody would be keen on purchasing 51% of a currency, because of it being restrictively costly. As indicated by game hypothesis, those with a bigger stake in a digital currency should need to keep up a safe system. Any assault would just serve to destabilize the cryptocurrency, reducing the value of their stake.

PoW vs PoS

Since we have comprehended the two strategies for timestamping, we will now delve into how each of them is basically dissimilar to each other. Obviously, PoS is speedier, less expensive and effective. Yet, at what cost?

The basic distinction lies in the way every technique handles the deceptive nature in the system. In PoW, in the event that somebody attempts to cheat while making a block, their dishonest acts is excused by alternate nodes in the system. In PoS, the deceitfulness is punished. Since forgiveness is normal in the previous type, there’s nothing preventing individuals from being untrustworthy. Then again, the PoS ensure that untruthfulness is extremely discouraged by putting the punishment.

Proof of stake incentivize honesty and punish malicious behavior.

PoS will be a more reasonable framework than PoW, as actually anybody could turn into a miner. PoS provides a direct scale with respect to the rate of blocks a miner can confirm, since it depends on that individual’s stake in the digital currency. That implies somebody with 10 times more coins (for example $10,000 versus $1,000) would just mine 10 times more blocks. Under PoW conventions, spending ten fold the amount of cash on mining equipment will deliver more computational power logarithmically, take into account greater hardware because of the nature of diminished costs when purchasing in bulk, and may offer additional benefits since exceptionally costly gear regularly works exponentially superior to its cheaper partners.

What is Terms Weight in PoS ?

A system’s Weight is a figure offered to every coins which are effectively Staking on the whole Network. The coins available in a wallet that are accessible for Staking possesses a weight. For instance if the Weight of the Network is 8000 and the Weight of your Coins is 2000, you possess a decent shot of making some new coins. Moreover if the Weight of your Coins is only one then the shot of you Minting a few new coins are very less. The Weight of the Coin is basically dependent on Coin Age. The older a coin is, its weight also increases as so does your chance of Minting coins.

Should I keep my wallet open 24/7 to receive my coins?

A wallet has to be open to mine new coins otherwise its not cosidered as staking.
At present the length of time the wallet is open is not accounted completely for the reward you receive. This means a person who opens his wallet 24/7 compared to another wallet which is open only few hours a month will almost receive the same amount of coins.
But the wallet which is open 24/7 will definitely more smaller amount of bonus coins compared to sparsely opened wallet.

Best situation is to open your wallet 24/7 so that the wallet provides a continues amount of mining power to the network.

How am I affected?

We’ve seen evidence of proof of stake currencies previously. Dash is one illustration where half of the rewards is carried out by mining and the other half is furnished by confirmation of stake. Also, there is PIVX which is 100% proof of stake. The upside of proof of stake is colossal. One advantage is that you never again need to do calculations, meaning that you spare a considerable measure of computational energy. Also, you can really lock up the money. By locking up the money you viably create scarcity of coins which implies the cost ought to go up.

Changing from POW to POS

Lets take the instance of Etheruem. Ethereum is planning a hardfork sooner rather than later to change from PoW to a PoS framework, most likely using an utilizing a protocol called Casper.

PoS would get rid of conventional miners, and establish remote miners, or validators. To get a chance to become a validator you must be bonded, which means you’d confer a specific volume of Ether to the Casper contract. The likelihood of a validator creating a block depends on their stake, which is like PoW where the likelihood of delivering a block is relative to a miner’s computational hashing power.

Once you’ve staked your Ether (ETH), you wont sepnd it insofar as you’re mining. Ethereum has said to have proposed a least and maximum number of Ether a validator can stake (1,500 ETH to 60,000 ETH.) The more you stake, the chance of solving a block is more. These particular numbers aren’t decided upfront, and in all probability won’t be until the point where the protocol is completely designed. The thought here is to ensure just a specific rate of all coins mined could be secured in the Casper contract. This would take care of any issue where the mass withholding of coins could affect the general value of the currency.

As a validator, the PoS convention will haphazardly dole out to you the privilege to make a block, in view of the estimation of your stake against the value of all Ether. Each block, a succession of validators is pseudorandomly chosen to make the following block. The main individual in the arrangement typically produces the block. On the chance that they happen to be disconnected, at which time they’d bring about penalties(which presently have not been decided) and undoubtedly be nullified as a miner, the protocol would essentially change to the following validator in the group, and will continue like that if necessary, until the point when an online remote miner makes a block.

At the point when a validator needs to stop their virtual mining, they can pull back their bond. Their Ether isn’t promptly returned however, they need to hold up a (starting as yet) unknown amount of time (likely between 12-24 hours) before accepting their payment. This is to guarantee certain sorts of assaults and fraud aren’t possible, giving the blockchain ample time to develop so their fraudulent behaviour can be invalidated.

While there are as yet numerous factors to be worked out, changing from Proof-of-Work to a Proof-of-Stake convention is not only good for the environment, it creates equal opportunities for miners, and expands community support. All of which is great

Last Verdict

With this new approach or algorithm (PoS), understanding within the blockchain will be evaluated not just on the premise of how much processing power concurs with the present state, however it will be based on the premise of how much digital cash concurs with the present state. The owners of this digital currency hold a monetary stake in the achievement of the blockchain that tracks it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *