✳flâneur — a map of the web's best reading

Proof-of-stake vs proof-of-work | ethereum.org

ethereum.org · 1,508 words · saved by 1 readers

When Ethereum launched, proof-of-stake still needed a lot of research and development before it could be trusted to secure Ethereum. Proof-of-work was a simpler mechanism that had already been proven by Bitcoin, meaning core developers could implement it right away to get Ethereum launched. It took a further eight years to develop proof-of-stake to the point where it could be implemented. This page explains the rationale behind Ethereum's switch to proof-of-stake from proof-of-work and the trade-offs involved. Ethereum researchers consider proof-of-stake more secure than proof-of-work. However, it has only recently been implemented for the real Ethereum Mainnet and is less time-proven than proof-of-work. The following sections discuss the pros and cons of proof-of-stake's security model compared to proof-of-work. In proof-of-stake, validators are required to escrow ("stake") at least 32 ETH in a smart contract. Ethereum can destroy staked ether to punish validators that misbehave. To c

Proof-of-stake vs proof-of-work Copy .md Copy .md Edit page (opens in a new tab) On this page When Ethereum launched, proof-of-stake still needed a lot of research and development before it could be trusted to secure Ethereum. Proof-of-work was a simpler mechanism that had already been proven by Bitcoin, meaning core developers could implement it right away to get Ethereum launched. It took a further eight years to develop proof-of-stake to the point where it could be implemented. This page explains the rationale behind Ethereum's switch to proof-of-stake from proof-of-work and the trade-offs

Explore this link on the map →

related reading