I m not in favor for complete elimination of PoW.
It all started with PoW and this system still work great proving security for many networks. On the other hand, combining PoW, PoS and any other option s something I like to see.
Topic: It's about time to turn off PoW mining - page 3. (Read 39732 times)
Check out Distributed social networks. There's a Proof of Social Contribution (PoSC) mechanism.
Users are rewarded for USEFUL work.
http://cointelegraph.com/news/113545/dor-konforty-synereo-is-the-natural-next-step-after-facebook
Users are rewarded for USEFUL work.
http://cointelegraph.com/news/113545/dor-konforty-synereo-is-the-natural-next-step-after-facebook
How can using tweeter or facebook be classified as beeing useful?
I don't belive this can subsitute POW. POW is the only thing that
has been proven useful so far IMO.
Doesn't work. The idea between both, PoW and PoS, is that said work or stake can't be faked in any way. It can be verified easily and very quickly and is something that is inherently "expensive" to achieve. Bringing in a centralized factor does even make less sense...
Check out Distributed social networks. There's a Proof of Social Contribution (PoSC) mechanism.
Users are rewarded for USEFUL work.
http://cointelegraph.com/news/113545/dor-konforty-synereo-is-the-natural-next-step-after-facebook
Users are rewarded for USEFUL work.
http://cointelegraph.com/news/113545/dor-konforty-synereo-is-the-natural-next-step-after-facebook
How can using tweeter or facebook be classified as beeing useful?
I don't belive this can subsitute POW. POW is the only thing that
has been proven useful so far IMO.
That's a good point, total waste of time for individuals imo, however don't forget those are already very useful tools to companies in many ways regarding promotion, marketing and so on, so I wouldn't be surprised if social media starts sort of merging with btc in different ways in the future, can't rule it out.
Lol this is so stupid
Check out Distributed social networks. There's a Proof of Social Contribution (PoSC) mechanism.
Users are rewarded for USEFUL work.
http://cointelegraph.com/news/113545/dor-konforty-synereo-is-the-natural-next-step-after-facebook
Users are rewarded for USEFUL work.
http://cointelegraph.com/news/113545/dor-konforty-synereo-is-the-natural-next-step-after-facebook
How can using tweeter or facebook be classified as beeing useful?
I don't belive this can subsitute POW. POW is the only thing that
has been proven useful so far IMO.
Check out Distributed social networks. There's a Proof of Social Contribution (PoSC) mechanism.
Users are rewarded for USEFUL work.
http://cointelegraph.com/news/113545/dor-konforty-synereo-is-the-natural-next-step-after-facebook
Users are rewarded for USEFUL work.
http://cointelegraph.com/news/113545/dor-konforty-synereo-is-the-natural-next-step-after-facebook
The cost to attack a PoS coin is nothing because they can sell the PoS coin after the attack is successful but prior to the market having a chance to react to such attack. In theory an attacker could deposit the PoS coin onto an exchange, sell it for BTC, withdraw the BTC then double spend the deposit onto another exchange and repeat
Wow, thanks for opening my eyes - this seems to be the most competent analysis of the topic I've seen so far.
This is why PoW is resistant to attacks and why, even if one entity controlled 51%+ of the network they would probably not attack it. Anyone who is mining will receive a reward that is only a small percentage of their total investment in the time it would take for an attack to be noticed and as a result they would likely lose out on future mining revenue if they were to attack the network
The cost to attack a PoS coin is nothing because they can sell the PoS coin after the attack is successful but prior to the market having a chance to react to such attack. In theory an attacker could deposit the PoS coin onto an exchange, sell it for BTC, withdraw the BTC then double spend the deposit onto another exchange and repeat
Wow, thanks for opening my eyes - this seems to be the most competent analysis of the topic I've seen so far.
This is why PoW is resistant to attacks and why, even if one entity controlled 51%+ of the network they would probably not attack it. Anyone who is mining will receive a reward that is only a small percentage of their total investment in the time it would take for an attack to be noticed and as a result they would likely lose out on future mining revenue if they were to attack the network
The cost to attack a PoS coin is nothing because they can sell the PoS coin after the attack is successful but prior to the market having a chance to react to such attack. In theory an attacker could deposit the PoS coin onto an exchange, sell it for BTC, withdraw the BTC then double spend the deposit onto another exchange and repeat
Wow, thanks for opening my eyes - this seems to be the most competent analysis of the topic I've seen so far.
This is why PoW is resistant to attacks and why, even if one entity controlled 51%+ of the network they would probably not attack it. Anyone who is mining will receive a reward that is only a small percentage of their total investment in the time it would take for an attack to be noticed and as a result they would likely lose out on future mining revenue if they were to attack the network
For now his " I only need 1% stake" for attacking nxt is only a claim (a bullshit one imo). Still I would donate him some money if he could pull of an attack on Nxt testnet.
His claim he made was 6.6% to attack NxT, that's why I used it above, not 1%.
Ok, then I need 2x the supply. Or maybe I need 1/30 of that and wait 30 days. So I need 1/15 of the supply. That's 6,6% according to your weight estimate. Not far from the 5% that I mentioned. So again: Not 50%. More like 6%
For now his " I only need 1% stake" for attacking nxt is only a claim (a bullshit one imo). Still I would donate him some money if he could pull of an attack on Nxt testnet.
Btw, is there some proof that he succeeded with apexcoin, or just his words?
Btw, is there some proof that he succeeded with apexcoin, or just his words?
Proof:
Bittrex confirmed his APEX attack.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10169983
The cost to attack a PoS coin is nothing because they can sell the PoS coin after the attack is successful but prior to the market having a chance to react to such attack. In theory an attacker could deposit the PoS coin onto an exchange, sell it for BTC, withdraw the BTC then double spend the deposit onto another exchange and repeat
Wow, thanks for opening my eyes - this seems to be the most competent analysis of the topic I've seen so far.
PoS proponents said it couldn't be done and kept insinuating that one would have to purchase up most of the currency to perform the attack but here is one example of a successful attack being committed on a real coin that was staking at 10 %:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/cleanup-ill-attack-some-coins-i-owned-apexcoin-for-90-blocks-897493
apexcoin attack successful with 0.07% of available supply (small, but the stake to destroy the coin was nothing- yes , you read that right, less than 1% stake!)
Other PoS coins are going to be targeted soon and with an end goal in attacking NxT eventually. A similar type of attack is claimed to be capable with around 6.6% of NxT(whether existing ownership, purchased, stolen , or borrowed by an exchange /bank)
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/cleanup-ill-attack-some-coins-i-owned-apexcoin-for-90-blocks-897493
apexcoin attack successful with 0.07% of available supply (small, but the stake to destroy the coin was nothing- yes , you read that right, less than 1% stake!)
I'll tell you my theories anyway: the two PhDs who wrote that research have a clear nxt bias. Look at their hidden multibranch section: they say that they got 3/20 of 500 blocks with 10% stake. 3/20 of 500 is 75 blocks. They got 75 blocks! if people wait for 6 confirmations, I only need 6 blocks, not 75. So I can do with much less than 10% stake. Of course 10% stake means 10% of actively forging coins, which means 10% of 10% of supply. So, much less than 1% of supply to double spend. Of course that's still a few hundred BTCs for NXT so I'll start with a smaller coin.
I already bought a few coins... just wait until age is accumulated...
I already bought a few coins... just wait until age is accumulated...
Other PoS coins are going to be targeted soon and with an end goal in attacking NxT eventually. A similar type of attack is claimed to be capable with around 6.6% of NxT(whether existing ownership, purchased, stolen , or borrowed by an exchange /bank)
LoL I just read cynicSOB's post again.
He says that it's very bad that kushti got 75 out of 500 blocks with 10% of all stake.
And he said he only needs 6 blocks
First of all, recommended confirmation time is about 30 blocks for Nxt. I don't see how 6 blocks would benefit him.
Next: kushtis 75 blocks weren't consecutive. And the blocks of cynicSOB would all be? I wonder how he believes to achieve this.
For now his " I only need 1% stake" for attacking nxt is only a claim (a bullshit one imo). Still I would donate him some money if he could pull of an attack on Nxt testnet.
Btw, is there some proof that he succeeded with apexcoin, or just his words?
PoS proponents said it couldn't be done and kept insinuating that one would have to purchase up most of the currency to perform the attack but here is one example of a successful attack being committed on a real coin that was staking at 10 %:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/cleanup-ill-attack-some-coins-i-owned-apexcoin-for-90-blocks-897493
apexcoin attack successful with 0.07% of available supply (small, but the stake to destroy the coin was nothing- yes , you read that right, less than 1% stake!)
Other PoS coins are going to be targeted soon and with an end goal in attacking NxT eventually. A similar type of attack is claimed to be capable with around 6.6% of NxT(whether existing ownership, purchased, stolen , or borrowed by an exchange /bank)
The cost to attack a PoS coin is nothing because they can sell the PoS coin after the attack is successful but prior to the market having a chance to react to such attack. In theory an attacker could deposit the PoS coin onto an exchange, sell it for BTC, withdraw the BTC then double spend the deposit onto another exchange and repeat https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/cleanup-ill-attack-some-coins-i-owned-apexcoin-for-90-blocks-897493
apexcoin attack successful with 0.07% of available supply (small, but the stake to destroy the coin was nothing- yes , you read that right, less than 1% stake!)
I'll tell you my theories anyway: the two PhDs who wrote that research have a clear nxt bias. Look at their hidden multibranch section: they say that they got 3/20 of 500 blocks with 10% stake. 3/20 of 500 is 75 blocks. They got 75 blocks! if people wait for 6 confirmations, I only need 6 blocks, not 75. So I can do with much less than 10% stake. Of course 10% stake means 10% of actively forging coins, which means 10% of 10% of supply. So, much less than 1% of supply to double spend. Of course that's still a few hundred BTCs for NXT so I'll start with a smaller coin.
I already bought a few coins... just wait until age is accumulated...
I already bought a few coins... just wait until age is accumulated...
Other PoS coins are going to be targeted soon and with an end goal in attacking NxT eventually. A similar type of attack is claimed to be capable with around 6.6% of NxT(whether existing ownership, purchased, stolen , or borrowed by an exchange /bank)
PoS proponents said it couldn't be done and kept insinuating that one would have to purchase up most of the currency to perform the attack but here is one example of a successful attack being committed on a real coin that was staking at 10 %:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/cleanup-ill-attack-some-coins-i-owned-apexcoin-for-90-blocks-897493
apexcoin attack successful with 0.07% of available supply (small, but the stake to destroy the coin was nothing- yes , you read that right, less than 1% stake!)
Other PoS coins are going to be targeted soon and with an end goal in attacking NxT eventually. A similar type of attack is claimed to be capable with around 6.6% of NxT(whether existing ownership, purchased, stolen , or borrowed by an exchange /bank)
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/cleanup-ill-attack-some-coins-i-owned-apexcoin-for-90-blocks-897493
apexcoin attack successful with 0.07% of available supply (small, but the stake to destroy the coin was nothing- yes , you read that right, less than 1% stake!)
I'll tell you my theories anyway: the two PhDs who wrote that research have a clear nxt bias. Look at their hidden multibranch section: they say that they got 3/20 of 500 blocks with 10% stake. 3/20 of 500 is 75 blocks. They got 75 blocks! if people wait for 6 confirmations, I only need 6 blocks, not 75. So I can do with much less than 10% stake. Of course 10% stake means 10% of actively forging coins, which means 10% of 10% of supply. So, much less than 1% of supply to double spend. Of course that's still a few hundred BTCs for NXT so I'll start with a smaller coin.
I already bought a few coins... just wait until age is accumulated...
I already bought a few coins... just wait until age is accumulated...
Other PoS coins are going to be targeted soon and with an end goal in attacking NxT eventually. A similar type of attack is claimed to be capable with around 6.6% of NxT(whether existing ownership, purchased, stolen , or borrowed by an exchange /bank)
Here is the formulation of my attack. The "Second Pirate Savings and Trust" attack on Proof-of-Stake. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10182752.
The problem with this statement is that attacks on the network are not noticed instantly. This means that someone could buy up a bunch of NXT (or lease it for mining purposes), attack the network, then go and sell the NXT they bought on an exchange
Agreed , that is why I used the word evidence and not proof of resiliency. Any hypothetical attack discussed can happen at any moment or may have already occurred.
We should be vigilant and protect against all these hypothetical attacks. Thus why I advocate for keeping PoW and adding a TaPoS layer/sidechain to Bitcoin.
all valid points.
Except Nxt (sorry to be specific again) is out in the open since over a year, and has a few million dollars incentive for a succesfull attack.
This doesn't mean an attack is not theoretically possible ofc.
Except Nxt (sorry to be specific again) is out in the open since over a year, and has a few million dollars incentive for a succesfull attack.
This doesn't mean an attack is not theoretically possible ofc.
Agreed, The longer NxT is out and the larger the market cap the more evidence there is to prove its resiliency to attacks. It is slipping in market cap so may die from obscurity before anyone is interested in attacking it with a N@S attack, but who knows, if it drops further one of the early investors may try and attack the coin in some fashion as an exit strategy.
It has had a slight reversal in the last month compared to BTC, but has suffered heavily over the last year.
ah now we're talking. so it's a n@s attack with borrowed stake after all.
Have you guys read kushtis paper that debunks n@s providing actual math?
here's the tl:dr
not possible at the moment. As always: I'm interested to be proven wrong.
Have you guys read kushtis paper that debunks n@s providing actual math?
here's the tl:dr
not possible at the moment. As always: I'm interested to be proven wrong.
It can be n@s but it does not have to.
The critical part is to acquire stake while at the same time maintaining a net short exposure to the coin. This is accomplished by a combination of borrowing the coin and then selling short a part of the borrowed coin. This sold coin becomes the profit to the attacker. The remainder of the borrowed coin is held and staked. At this point the market sees a conventional bear raid and the network sees nothing out of the ordinary. When the attacker has accumulated enough coin for the attack the exit strategy out of the bear raid is unleashed by launching the attack. This causes the coin value to plunge to 0, allowing the bear raid short to be covered at no cost to the attacker.
all valid points.
Except Nxt (sorry to be specific again) is out in the open since over a year, and has a few million dollars incentive for a succesfull attack.
This doesn't mean an attack is not theoretically possible ofc.
Except Nxt (sorry to be specific again) is out in the open since over a year, and has a few million dollars incentive for a succesfull attack.
This doesn't mean an attack is not theoretically possible ofc.
Agreed, The longer NxT is out and the larger the market cap the more evidence there is to prove its resiliency to attacks. It is slipping in market cap so may die from obscurity before anyone is interested in attacking it with a N@S attack, but who knows, if it drops further one of the early investors may try and attack the coin in some fashion as an exit strategy.
It has had a slight reversal in the last month compared to BTC, but has suffered heavily over the last year.
In general if you hold 1 billion US Dollars, it's not in your best financial interests to cause an action to plummet the price of the US Dollar. Same for POS coins. Also, please provide an actual example of a large short staking a POS coin by being short to successfully attack a POS coin.
Actually, if you're an exporter, there's huge profit in the dollar declining, if you're in importer, not so much.
Jump to: