I don't think the concepts of Proof-Of-Stake is limited to locking tokens. Just like the concept of Proof-Of-Work can be found in the real world outside of Bitcoin mining.
The idea of Proof-Of-Stake is that initial capital gives you a head start.
Proof-Of-Stake is not necessarily evil UNLESS you apply it to dictates the rules of money.
Then I think our definitions of proof-of-stake differ. Initial capital can give you a head start, sure. but you’ll still need to know how to use it. There’s countless examples in the real world of business squandering opportunities despite having had a head start. With capital or otherwise. To get back to your earlier posts: just because one of the miners has more capital, doesn’t automatically mean it’s gonna be more successful. The probability might be higher, but it’s not a guarantee.
I agree with all this. I don't think Proof-Of-Stake = failure is impossible. I even think it makes it more likely.
A business that grew up from the ground without VC capital is stronger than one that was built on it.
This is why BullBitcoin is the Bitcoin standard of exchanges. It grew up from the ground up with very little starting capital. Most of the growth was obtained by generating profits. Because of that I cannot imagine BullBitcoin failing ever. It's a strong business. Pure Proof-Of-Work.
