Topic: Which Proof of Stake System is the Most Viable - page 4. (Read 25785 times)

Quote from: clout on June 16, 2014, 04:29:11 AM

IMO, trying to grab control with 50 puppets instead of 2 is much more difficult.

I know. You said that. But I was asking of the why? Where is the additional difficulty?

Because people have to vote for the delegates. Also in what situation would anyone profit from a manipulation of 51% of the delegates? Or for that matter in what situation do you believe that anyone would profit from Ghash.io performing a 51% attack on the bitcoin network?

I'm a big supporter of BitShares but in terms of who would profit from a Ghash.io 51% attack on Bitcoin...

TPTB behind the traditional banking system have $ trillions on the line, Bitcoin and crypto-currencies are a big threat, especially as I see capital controls and deposit confiscations in a lot of Western countries futures.

Performing a 51% attack on the Bitcoin network via Ghash.io, if it could decimate the price as well as significantly damage public faith in crypto-currencies would be extremely valuable to them imo, no?

eeee12344

member

Activity: 73

Merit: 10

No doubt
NXT is great。。。

clout

full member

Activity: 207

Merit: 100

Ok... so let someone incur the cost of "attacking" the network. If the shareholders are not complacent then they will just for the network and the attacker will have control of a worthless network. You simply are not considering the economic cost of attacking the network. What you consider an attack is not actually an attack at all.

idlecore

newbie

Activity: 6

Merit: 0

Quote from: idlecore on June 15, 2014, 09:02:19 PM

Quote from: idlecore on June 15, 2014, 09:02:19 PM

IMO, trying to grab control with 50 puppets instead of 2 is much more difficult.

I know. You said that. But I was asking of the why? Where is the additional difficulty?

Because people have to vote for the delegates. Also in what situation would anyone profit from a manipulation of 51% of the delegates? Or for that matter in what situation do you believe that anyone would profit from Ghash.io performing a 51% attack on the bitcoin network?

They can be sued/hacked/coerced by governments, banks or other corporations. Preventing an entity from profiting from a 50% attack isn't enough.

If anything prevents a delegate from doing his job (ie signing a block at the designated time) then he will be voted out and replaced by a delegate that is not being sued hacked or coerced by governments. Delegates have a simple task and do not have that much power. Shareholders will vote for the most diverse set of delegates in order to maintain a resilient network. Global competition is the most robust solution to the problems you described.

The point made was that the possibility of attack will be there whether it is profitable or not.

clout

full member

Activity: 207

Merit: 100

IMO, trying to grab control with 50 puppets instead of 2 is much more difficult.

I know. You said that. But I was asking of the why? Where is the additional difficulty?

Because people have to vote for the delegates. Also in what situation would anyone profit from a manipulation of 51% of the delegates? Or for that matter in what situation do you believe that anyone would profit from Ghash.io performing a 51% attack on the bitcoin network?

They can be sued/hacked/coerced by governments, banks or other corporations. Preventing an entity from profiting from a 50% attack isn't enough.

If anything prevents a delegate from doing his job (ie signing a block at the designated time) then he will be voted out and replaced by a delegate that is not being sued hacked or coerced by governments. Delegates have a simple task and do not have that much power. Shareholders will vote for the most diverse set of delegates in order to maintain a resilient network. Global competition is the most robust solution to the problems you described.

idlecore

newbie

Activity: 6

Merit: 0