Vitalik谈POW并不是由电力背书

网友发帖：

Vitalik谈POW并不是由电力背书。

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/com ... rgue_that_powbased/
这是篇有关POS和POW的讨论，以太因为有走向完全POS的倾向，所以也在进行这方面的研究，这个话题的意义重大，因为如果证明POW是不必要的，那么必然对现有矿工群体产生巨大的冲击，所以也是个政治上很敏感的话题，我摘录一些观点：
以下是Vitalik说的：
""""""""""""""""""--
Some people make arguments of the form 'because bitcoins are mined, BTC literally are crystalized energy, and this in some sense makes bitcoins "real" and connected to energy in some metaphysical but economically relevant sense'. However, economics doesn't care about metaphysical connections, it only cares about supply and demand. That's it; the supply curve and the demand curve are the only determinants of price (unless you have weird multi-equilibrium scenarios like Giffen goods but I won't get into that here as it's not relevant to this scenario).
有些人说，因为比特币是挖矿得到的，所以实际上比特币是能量的结晶，这是比特币和物理世界能量之间的联系。但是，经济学可不管物理的联系，只和供需有关。供需曲线是决定价格的唯一决定因素（除非你讨论一些特殊的现象如吉芬物品，但在此不讨论因为离题太远）
Now, how does the fact that there exist miners that expend energy and generate coins affect the supply and demand curves? Well miners in their capacity as miners do not need to buy any coins, so they do not contribute to demand. When a miner generates coins, they can either hodl (net market effect: neutral) or sell (net market effect: supply increase). Supply increases drive down price, hence miners are a negative influence on price.
那么，现有的矿工是如何影响供给曲线的呢？矿工显然不需要购买比特币，所以他们并不增加币的需求。当矿工产出币的时候，他们也许持有（不增加市场供给）也许卖出（增加市场供给）。供给增加导致币价下跌，所以说矿工对币价有一个负面的影响
Some people make the argument that miners create a price floor because they have some cost of generating coins and won't mine any more coins if the price drops below that floor. However, this argument is flawed for two reasons. First, if miners stop mining, difficulty drops, cutting the cost of generating coins further, so it's not a real floor. Second, and more importantly, no matter what miners do at any price level, their net effect on the market is always at best neutral, and in practice almost always a downward push, compared to a hypothetical base case where miners are not generating any coins at all.
有人说矿工给出了一个挖矿成本，作为价格地板，价格跌到成本以下他们就不再挖矿。但这个说法有两个缺陷：一是如果矿工停止挖矿，难度就会降低，使得挖矿成本也降低，所以这个价格地板并不是那么牢固。第二，无论矿工在任何价位做任何事，他们最多是不提供更多的抛售，实际上总是会产生更多的抛压，如果你对比一个已经完全无币可挖的场景
Hence miners' role in the market is in contributing to the sell side, whereas true "backing" involves contributing to the buy side.
所以说矿工仅仅只是造成了抛压，真正对于价格的支持背书应该是来自于买入方
Note that none of this denies the value that miners provide in securing the network. However, it does mean, among other things, that if there was some other way to secure a network that did not require as much issuance and that provided an adequate level of security, then the impact on the currency's price can only be positive.
注意矿工的价值在于保证网络的安全。不过这也意味着，如果有另一种办法可以同样保证网络的安全，却不需要产生象矿工这么大的抛压，那么对于货币的价格来说应该只会是积极的
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""--
一下为一些回帖意见，我有一条
You are correct. However, I would like to add that the issuance does impact perception which impacts demand. When I first heard about Bitcoin and learned t