Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Quai's new consensus mechanism, Proof-of-Entropy-Minima (PoEM), is a small modification to Nakamoto Consensus that opens the door to infinite multi-chain coordination Let's learn how👇 1/

25,922 views • 3 years ago •via X (Twitter)

16 Comments

Quai Network ⚡️💵's profile picture
Quai Network ⚡️💵3 years ago

First, it's important to understand Nakamoto Consensus (NC). Nakamoto Consensus is the most common implementation of Proof-of-Work, and is used in Bitcoin. 2/

Quai Network ⚡️💵's profile picture
Quai Network ⚡️💵3 years ago

Nakamoto Consensus uses a difficulty threshold to determine whether a block has performed enough "work" to be considered valid. Importantly, any blocks that exceed this difficulty threshold are treated as equally valid. 3/

Quai Network ⚡️💵's profile picture
Quai Network ⚡️💵3 years ago

Proof-of-Entropy-Minima (PoEM) uses an entropy removal threshold that is similar to Nakamoto Consensus' difficulty threshold. Blocks that remove enough entropy to exceed this threshold are considered valid options for nodes to select. 4/

Quai Network ⚡️💵's profile picture
Quai Network ⚡️💵3 years ago

A major difference between PoEM and NC is that PoEM does not treat all blocks that exceed the entropy removal threshold as equally valid. Under PoEM, a block can remove more entropy than the threshold, and have that additional entropy removal be counted in the block weight. 5/

Quai Network ⚡️💵's profile picture
Quai Network ⚡️💵3 years ago

But why does this matter? Bitcoin seems to be operating fine, right? Yes, but sometimes an event occurs that interrupts consensus. Every ~300 Bitcoin blocks, something called an orphan block is produced. 6/

Quai Network ⚡️💵's profile picture
Quai Network ⚡️💵3 years ago

An orphan block is a valid block that is not included in the canonical blockchain, and is essentially "thrown out." These blocks occur when two valid blocks are proposed near-simultaneously, and nodes are forced to select one over the other. 7/

Quai Network ⚡️💵's profile picture
Quai Network ⚡️💵3 years ago

In Bitcoin, when two valid blocks are proposed in this manner, nodes have no preference between them. Because Nakamoto Consensus treats all blocks that exceed the difficulty threshold as equal, there is no mechanism to determine which block nodes should prefer. 8/

Quai Network ⚡️💵's profile picture
Quai Network ⚡️💵3 years ago

When this occurs, nodes will simply prefer whichever block they saw first. Oftentimes, this will lead to ~50% of the network mining one of the proposed blocks, with the remainder of the network mining the other proposed block. 9/

Quai Network ⚡️💵's profile picture
Quai Network ⚡️💵3 years ago

The only way this consensus fork can be resolved is by another block being produced on top of one of the proposed blocks. Once this next block is produced, all miners return to mine the longest/heaviest chain, orphaning the other proposed block. 10/

Quai Network ⚡️💵's profile picture
Quai Network ⚡️💵3 years ago

This contention in consensus, while a minor inconvenience for BTC miners/nodes, has massive implications for a multi-chain system like Quai. If each Quai chain had a long tail for consensus time, cross-chain coordination could only occur at the very end of this long tail. 11/

Quai Network ⚡️💵's profile picture
Quai Network ⚡️💵3 years ago

Additionally, the potential for this uncertainty to occur introduces a cap on the number of blockchains that can be coordinated. In order to coordinate an infinite number of shards/blockchains, Quai Network needs consensus to be immediate and unanimous, 100% of the time. 12/

Quai Network ⚡️💵's profile picture
Quai Network ⚡️💵3 years ago

That's where PoEM comes in. Unlike Nakamoto Consensus, which causes nodes to essentially guess which block will be selected in the case of two simultaneously-proposed blocks, PoEM allows nodes to compare all proposed blocks against each other. 13/

Quai Network ⚡️💵's profile picture
Quai Network ⚡️💵3 years ago

Under PoEM, no two blocks are ever considered "equally valid." Even if both proposed blocks exceed the entropy removal threshold, nodes are able to identify and prefer the block that removed the greater amount of entropy. 14/

Quai Network ⚡️💵's profile picture
Quai Network ⚡️💵3 years ago

This eliminates the period of uncertainty that occurs in Nakamoto Consensus when an orphan block is produced. Orphan/uncle blocks can still be produced in Quai. The difference is that in Quai, these orphan/uncle blocks have no impact on time-to-consensus. 15/

Quai Network ⚡️💵's profile picture
Quai Network ⚡️💵3 years ago

PoEM ensures that at every point of consensus, all nodes can immediately discern which block is "heaviest," and which block they should be mining on. This is a necessary prerequisite to infinite multi-chain coordination. 16/

Quai Network ⚡️💵's profile picture
Quai Network ⚡️💵3 years ago

The ideas shared about PoEM in this thread are just the tip of the iceburg. To learn more about the PoEM consensus mechanism and how it allows Quai to truly scale infinitely, check out the Quai Documentation: Thanks for reading! 17/17

Related Videos

💥DTCC & Ripple 💥 🌹 Current Ripple Advisor, Former CEO of DTCC, Outlined DTCC’s Essential Demands — Which Mirror the XRP Consensus Mechanism 🌹🌷🌺 Rare DTCC Video and documents below 👇 🌹 Donahue on Central Management (2016) > “It is imperative to have transactions flow through something that can be subjected to central management.” — Donald Donahue, former CEO of DTCC, DTCC Blockchain Symposium, Future of Blockchain 🌷 Schwartz on Ripple Consensus (2018) > “Through the consensus process, validators agree on a specific subset of the candidate transactions … servers communicate and update proposals until a supermajority of chosen validators agree on the same set of candidate transactions.” — David Schwartz, Ripple CTO, Consensus vs. Proof-of-Work 🌺 Analysis Donahue’s statement and Schwartz’s explanation can be read as complementary articulations of the same requirement: that financial settlement infrastructures must be distributed but not uncontrolled. Donahue outlined the institutional demand for governance and oversight, while Schwartz described how Ripple’s consensus delivers this through validator coordination and supermajority agreement. Ripple’s architecture therefore operationalises precisely the type of “central management” Donahue considered indispensable. 🌻 Donahue on Automated Infrastructure (2016) > “A processing infrastructure that operates completely on automatic without a central managing hand would drive the financial system straight off a cliff.” — Donald Donahue, former CEO of DTCC, DTCC Blockchain Symposium 🌼 Nakamoto on Bitcoin’s Trustless System (2008) > “We have proposed a system for electronic transactions without relying on trust.” (p. 8) “The network timestamps transactions by hashing them into an ongoing chain of hash-based proof-of-work.” (p. 2) “Proof-of-work is essentially one-CPU-one-vote.” (p. 3) 🌸 Analysis Placed side by side, these quotations highlight the stark divergence between institutional and decentralised philosophies of settlement. Nakamoto championed a system deliberately devoid of managerial oversight, where proof-of-work and distributed consensus replaced institutional governance. Donahue, however, characterised such automation as a potential catastrophe for systemic stability. His warning thus functions as an institutional counterweight to Nakamoto’s thesis, underscoring the incompatibility between the governance needs of global clearinghouses like the DTCC and the ungoverned automation of Bitcoin. 🌹References (Harvard style) Donahue, D. (2016). DTCC Blockchain Symposium, Future of Blockchain, ft. Donald Donahue. [Video]. YouTube. Available at: [Accessed 14 Oct. 2025]. Schwartz, D. (2018). Ripple and XRP – Part 7: Consensus vs. Proof-of-Work. [Video]. YouTube. Available at: [Accessed 14 Oct. 2025]. Ripple Labs (n.d.). Consensus Structure. XRPL Documentation. Available at: [Accessed 14 Oct. 2025]. Nakamoto, S. (2008). Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System. Available at: [Accessed 14 Oct. 2025]. DTCC (2024). Annual Report 2024. Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation. Available at: [Accessed 14 Oct. 2025]. #xrp #xrpl #ripple

ProfessoRipplEffect

120,798 views • 10 months ago

Stephen Meyer just exposed one of the dirtiest secrets of modern science. We’re constantly told: “Trust the science.” “The scientific consensus says…” But scientists are only exposing themselves when they say things like that, according to Meyer. “When scientists appeal to consensus, almost invariably, there isn’t one.” “You only appeal to consensus to shut down dissenting opinions.” “If there really is a consensus, you don’t need to appeal to one.” “Scientists never say: the consensus is that the formula for water is H2O.” “They only appeal to consensus when there’s actual debate, and they want to shut down a dissenting group of scientists who hold a different opinion.” “We’ve had this move made or applied against us numerous times.” “Proponents of intelligent design, or critics of Darwinian evolution or neo-Darwinian evolution will be told: this is settled science, and to challenge it is pseudoscience.” “When there’s an appeal to consensus… it’s usually a rhetorical ploy to silence an alternative perspective or a group of dissenting scientists.” “And this is actually ironically profoundly unscientific behavior.” “If there’s no serious dissent, you don’t need to appeal to consensus.” “When people appeal to settled science or consensus, it’s often a tell that there’s subterranean dissent that needs to be heard.” Stay tuned for my full interview with Stephen C. Meyer—coming this Saturday at 5PM ET!

Jan Jekielek

11,823 views • 4 months ago