Scaling debate between PoW (Bitcoin) vs PoS (Cardano)?

How would PoS scale in comparision to PoW? Lets for instance take the example of Bitcoin :Lightening Network seems to scale. Blocksize increase is another solution to scale. Lets nt go into debate about Blocksize once again. The point is :Will PoS and Cardano Scale better? How much better theoratically?
Charles Hoskinson says frequently : we will scale to millions and millions of transaction. The big question is : HOW? HOW IS LIGHT WALLETS SUPPOSE TO SCALE?


Good question. Many people think Cardano is just one chain and that’s where their mistake lies.

Cardano will consist of many chains. The settlement layer (SL) will be the base layer. It can scale up to 250tps but this could be improved with sharing, etc.

Then we have the Computational Layer (CL), which consists of virtually infinite number of sidechains with two-way pegs to SL. All processing transactions at any variety of speeds, with any flavor of consensus mechanisms and permission levels.

When we talk about LN or block size, we are still talking about improvements to the same one chain.

When we talk about CL sidechains, we expand our horizons beyond one chain, beyond one architecture (as you can replicate any current crypto on Cardano’s secure CL) and by extension you can process huge number of transactions without touching the issue of block sizes in the SL.

SL is a secure base line with which the sidechains “check in” periodically to update state, how often they check in depends on the design of the sidechain and it’s goals. They can “check in” with SL every second to years.


I recommend watching this 5 minute answer from Charles about scalability, limitations,
and maximum TPS:


So the MAIN question arise : How much ist Sidechains practically realiseable? And how far are we from actually seein it? What if it isnt developed till 2020 when IOHK contracts ends? And if the foundation after IOHK doesnt have that resources and talents to explore and develop Sidechains fully?

Their theoretical/cryptographic foundations have been already proven as far as I know. This is a resource intensive part of protocol development.

The one that requires mos time. Now the question is how fast can they be developed into products. Sidechains are on the roadmap and I have little doubt IOHK will implement them even if their timeline is shifted.

The year 2020 isn’t much of a risk as CH said it many times, their commitment is to complete the project.

Another (game theoretic) thing to consider:

Do you think they would have any business as a crypto/blockchain building company if they abandon Cardano without first honoring their commitment?

1 Like

I completely get what u say. but then why not say, IOHK will work till ABOUT 2020 when the development is OVER (nearly) instead of saying we are there till 2020???

That would at least mean they are commited to complete the project and that 2020 is just a approx. time when everything is achieved. The later would mean, we are JUST RESPONSIBLE till 2020 and no mention whatsoever of completing the project.

Yes. I think the documents you read were all drafted back in 2016/17. Things shifted since then. Shelley would be a year late. It is reasonable to assume other parts of the project will be too.

I don’t know what the exact terms of the agreement are, but to me Charles’ words which point unequivocally to supporting the project till the scope is complete, are enough.