[josephagoss]

Tezos is Proof of stake, decentralized and clearly has consensus, the three things the author argues cannot occur in a proof of stake system.

I did not find this post convincing especially as many proof of stake systems have been running consistently for years now and with significant transaction and economic volume.

As an example Tezos has decentralized apps such as liquidity pools, collateral based stablecoin systems, nft ecosystems, coin bridges to other networks such as Ethereum (two way) I use these smart contracts on a weekly basis and have done for a long time now.

Tezos manages several orders of magnitude more transaction throughput based on opcode count count vs Bitcoin, transactions, even complex ones cost pennies the network has not been attacked, is worth billions and Tezos energy usage is easily a million times less than Bitcoin.

[SideburnsOfDoom]

> the three things the author argues cannot occur in a proof of stake system.

The author appears to be saying that "any decentralized consensus via proof of stake system is vulnerable to timing attacks"

The counter-argument that "This here proof of stake system has not been successfully attacked ... that we know of ... yet" does not seem to be watertight.