I recently read a tweet linking to an elaborate analysis trying to demonstrate that, for a given level of security, proof of stake (PoS) would be more costly than proof of work (PoW):

https://twitter.com/knifefight/status/1398063621251366915

I found the explanation contrieved and strewn with logical fallacies to the point I stopped reading before the end. 

But that is beyond the point. 

If one wants to defend PoW, I believe it is misguided to reason in terms of "cost". Humanity is rich and multidimensional, not everything can be reduced to a "credit and debit" entry in an accountant's table, to a "profit and loss" account. Love, liberty, truth are not amenable to a "bean counter" treatment. 

I mean one should not even begin a "cost" argument when it comes to something as fundamental as freedom, and Bitcoin represents freedom. PoW is the only known consensus mechanism which can support the [Bitcoin "exit machine"](https://hive.blog/bitcoin/@sorin.cristescu/the-exit-machine)


![image.png](https://files.peakd.com/file/peakd-hive/sorin.cristescu/23sUeSPBWy1pbVdgkzBF17De1fuvNBR793emwwJsMETfV8RXScgoU7Ybp3DrZixn9GG1J.png)


Hive is DPoS and that is perfectly fine, because Bitcoin's "censorship resistance" protects it, and all the cryptocurrencies, by dissuading attackers, not unlike how the USA protects Taiwan or the NATO partner countries.