Consensus algorithms are one of the most debated subjects in the blockchain ecosystem.
The consensus algorithm is actually a rule, and each node confirms its data according to this rule. Let’s put aside the principle of the algorithm, think about how we will solve such a problem in our life: a group of people has a meeting, there is no leader or boss in this group, everyone expresses their opinions, then how to come out a unitive decision? Generally, we usually choose a person in a certain period, that person is responsible for summarizing everyone’s opinion, and then release the full opinion, others vote, everyone has the opportunity to do summary release, and finally, we will choose the opinion from the supporter which person are the most depends on.
All blockchain consensus-building approaches are deemed effective if they are able to solve the popular Byzantine General’s Problem. Like PoW（Proof of Work）、PoS（Proof of Stake）、DPoS（Delegate Proof of Stake）、PBFT（Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance）.
The two most representative consensus algorithms are POW and POS.
Proof of Work (POW for short) should be regarded as one of the most common consensus algorithms. A simple understanding is a proof to confirm that you have done a certain amount of work. The entire process of monitoring work is usually extremely inefficient, but it is also a very efficient way to prove the corresponding workload by certifying the results of the work. For example, in real life, a graduation certificate, driving license, etc., are also certificates obtained through inspection results (passing relevant examinations).
When it comes to POW, the first thing everyone thinks of must be the most valuable and famous digital currency now, Bitcoin.
The process of POW is to take different nonce values as input and try to perform a SHA256 hash operation to find a hash value that satisfies a given number of leading 0. The greater the number of leading 0 required, the greater the difficulty.
If the blockchain participants (called “miners”) want to add a transaction to the blockchain that must solve some sort of “complex but useless” computing problem.
In essence, this approach can ensure that miners spend some money or resources (mining machines) to complete the work, which means that they will not damage the blockchain system because damage to the system will also lead to loss of investment.
PoW is a battle-tested, researched and technically proven means of securing a blockchain, but it isn’t perfect.
1. The emergence of the mining pool against the original intention of decentralization to a certain extent, and also make 51% attacks possible. It will affect security.
2. There is a huge waste of computing power by PoW. At present, the amount of electricity consumed by the Bitcoin blockchain each year is roughly the same as that of the entire country of Chile.
So there is Proof of Stake（POS for short), The emergence of PoS is largely an alternative algorithm proposed due to the defects of PoW.
Unlike PoW systems, consensus choosing the miners by the coins to staking or others functions. All the coins exist from inception and validators are paid in transaction fees. The chances of someone being chosen to validate a transaction depend on the fraction of coins in the system that the validator owns.
So why can’t Proof of Stake (PoS) become the next king of consensus mechanisms?
PoS is considered faster, cheaper and efficient. However, the primary goal of blockchain protocols should NOT be efficient in itself. The speed must come on the background of decentralization.
VISA and Mastercard are efficient. PayPal is efficient. Efficiency is something that we have already achieved. Decentralization, however, is still the goal and remains a moving target.
One of the most substantial issues of PoS systems is that they are less decentralized than the other alternatives. They are considered to be much less secure than PoW systems.
We’ll take the example of Ethereum. The current version of Casper on Github shows that it will be 1250 ETH. The smallest betting amount would be north of 1000 Ethers. Not everyone has that sort of balance. And thus, NOT everyone would be able to take part in betting and getting rewarded.
Above a certain threshold, say 1250 ETH, everyone gets richer proportionally to how rich they already were. Below this threshold, the poor stay poor. Over a period, the gap will become significant, and therefore, the power to influence the Ethereum network will lie in the hands of a few. What’s more serious is that an attacker can get enough coins in some ways, generate a new enough blockchain at one time, and launch a Long-Range Attack. Or mining on multiple forks at the same time to obtain the maximum profit, which is called Nothing at Stake.
The consensus is not as straightforward as it appears. As with anything in Computer Science, trade-offs have to be made.
Proof-of-Proof (POP for short) is the latest attempt. It is essentially a new public chain protocol that takes advantage of the high security of Bitcoin to increase its security. In the early days when the market value was low and the ecology was small, this effect was particularly obvious in defending against attacks.
Let’s use Poporo as an example to illustrate Pop.
Poporo’s block generation process is divided into two stages.
1. Packaging stage. Poporo miners need to initiate a special transaction in the BTC blockchain. This special transaction will be packaged into the BTC blockchain, and after the BTC blockchain generates several blocks, it will be used as the basis for the subsequent Poporo block generation.
2. Generation stage. Poporo miners collect Pop transactions in bitcoin networks. Each Pop transaction corresponds to a miner. A miner with potential block generation right is selected and this miner is responsible for block production.
In this system, if an attacker wants to launch an attack, such as reorganizing the entire block and launching a Long-Range Attack, in addition to reorganizing Poporos own block, since the block header is already embedded in the Bitcoin network in the Pop transaction, it must also be restructuring the Bitcoin network.
This cost is obviously much larger than PoS. We can think that the cost of attacking Poporo is indirectly equal to the cost of attacking Bitcoin. This undoubtedly greatly increases the security of the entire system.
That is Poporo, with high security and further decentralization than most of the alternatives.
Poporo is a hard fork from Monero, a completely different idea was chosen to solve the ASIC resistance problem of Monero’s POW algorithm. This method takes advantage of the high security of the BTC network and increases the security of the entire network without losing the advantages of decentralization and anonymity of the Monero itself.
Poporo hopes to bring a more secure and completely anonymous cryptocurrency that can be used in various payment scenarios and avoid all possible censorship.
Poporo, forked at block 2051693 of Monero,03/11/2020 @ 12:15 am (UTC), for each Monero (XMR), an owner got 1 Poporo.
The vast majority of us crypto enthusiasts have a genuine heart for marrying technology and social action, and I believe it’s time we reflect on where we wanted to go with digital currencies, honestly take stock of the state of blockchain technology today, and rigorously plan how to improve digital currencies moving forward.
I believe that with some more compassion and creative thinking, cryptocurrencies can evolve toward the egalitarianism and liberation that inspires us deeply.
Please visit the project website https://poporo.io — for further details or get in contact with the team directly: