Litecoin is the second most secure PoW coin in the universe. It would be quite difficult and in many perspectives in practical to assert a 51% attack. The hardware is not there, yet. Litecoin is fine example of a PoW model.
It's not that I don't believe you but how did you arrive at this conclusion? If scrypt can't generate the hash that sha256d can then how do you compare the security of the two systems? By appearances there are several coins that have a higher hashrate the litecoin.
HashrateI think what NattyLiteCoin was tryig to explain is something like this: since the scrypt algorithm is "harder" for a computer to solve, for example a (equivalent) hardware that does 10GH/s in SHA256 does e.g. 1000kH/s in scrypt (just an example, not real figures). So the "numbers" (hashing speed) will be smaller in general and because of this it might seem that you could simply bring in 2 TH/s and kill the network. However, this is not the case as there is no such hardware yet and it is more complicated as well to create scrypt based ASICS.
SecurityIt comes down to the previous fact. The bitcoin network has probably a larger user base and hence larger hash rate (here I mean if I would convert the values of scrypt to sha256), however the scrypt algorithm is "harder" (as per above) ad hence a lower hashrate can also secure the network, because suddenly adding large hash rate is not possible.
Bitcoin vs Litecoin = Bigger, simpler vs. Smaller, more coplex
This.. My CPU mined bitcoin with a higher hashrate than my gpu mined litecoin.
Litecoin is pretty secure, and merge mining with dogecoin certainly helped.
ok, this raises another question, if litecoin was already secure, then why would it need to merge with dogecoin?
so far in this thread no one has answered the main question, how you rate the litecoin security to bitcoin and bitcoin merge mined coins.
Bitcoin vs Litecoin = Bigger, simpler vs. Smaller, more coplex ok I get this but how can one arrive at the conclusion that litecoin is the second most secure coin? Is it just that it is secure enough and has an early mover network advantage, so people just use it regardless of security?
Maybe I'm asking the wrong question.
#1 secure sha256d coin, bitcoin
#2 secure sha256d coin, namecoin
#3 secure sha256d coin, ixcoin
#1 secure scrypt coin, litecoin
#2 secure scrypt coin, doge?
#3 secure scrypt coin, ?
hmmm, how to word this.....
it seems that the argument is this, in the sha256d camp the top 3 coins are the most secure and in the scrypt camp the top three coins are the most secure. because the two algorithms are different it is impossible for one camp to attack the other camp. And because of this it is not possible to compare litecoin security to bitcoin security.
So the correct statement should be that litecoin is not the second most secure coin but that it is the most secure scrypt coin. Whereas bitcoin is the most secure sha256d coin.
if we compare the security of the two then we can't compare them with hash alone as they calc hash differently. We maybe need to factor in cost to attack the network and the health of the network?