Topic: Governance and Consensus Protocols (Read 112 times)

Ive recently been mulling over what the best types of consensus protocols will be as this industry expands and scales up. One of the major factors in having a successful scale up whilst maintaining the integrity (decentralisation, distributed, immutable) will be the type of consensus protocols a project chooses.

Bitcoin uses the Proof of work (POW)
Ethereum are in transition from POW to Proof of steak (POS) via casper
EOS,LISK,STEEM and a few others use delegated proof of steak (DPOS)
NEO use delegated byzantine fault tolerance (DBFT)

I know of a few others such as: Proof of Activity
                                              Proof of Burn
                                              Proof of Capacity
                                              Proof of Elapsed Time
                                              Proof of Attention

Now my deliberation comes with this, apart from proof of work there are no other consensus protocols that I know of that forces people to put "skin in the game". To a point where you pretty much need to expand resources just to have a say and I feel like this is the only one that achieves true security. Is it even possible to have long term success and scaling without 100% security?

I do think some of these alternative protocols have some really cool innovative ideas but can they scale and achieve the required levels of security needed to stave of constant attacks? Or am I overestimating the need for skin in the game for security?