kaal:claim:3782210-036

A meaningful reputational system with the potential for retrospective review would let a network rely on fewer nodes, since randomly selected nodes staking their reputation can do the polling work and be reviewed and punished later, which is one reason proof of stake is more efficient than proof of work.

But if we had a meaningful reputa- tional system with the potential for review, we could rely on fewer nodes. This mech- anism is one reason proof of stake is more efficient than proof of work.

Craig Calcaterra, Wulf A. Kaal, The Importance of Reputation for the Evolution of Decentralization (2021), Criticisms, p. 14
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3782210 · source PDF

Craig Calcaterra, Wulf A. Kaal, The Importance of Reputation for the Evolution of Decentralization (2021). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3782210

• consensus is near unanimous nearly all the time
• Byzantine behavior is detectable on later review

designsupport: arguedconsensus-and-securitygovernance-designeconomics

• extends kaal:claim:3266953-017 Meaningful and secure reputation tokens supply the incentives needed for secure proof of stake consensus in bl...
• extends kaal:claim:3125827-032 SPoS is far more computationally efficient than proof of work implementations because nodes no longer hash min...

The quote above is an exact substring of the source PDF, whose sha256 is 9cc531ab239f6266c8aeddcc8e54f4c06029c44e825444bee137bbcc0c9d0a8e. Extraction method: pdf-text-layer.
Attestation record: colloquium/attestations/115dd838e35eadd7...json
Verify the binding yourself: curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/3782210-036.md | sha256sum