3 ms·
I have to say I appreciate your transparency in directly Bitcoin shilling. > If you compromise or coerce enough validators, you can rewrite the history for no
by pshc 5y ago
I have to say I appreciate your transparency in directly Bitcoin shilling.
> If you compromise or coerce enough validators, you can rewrite the history for no cost.
If you can. You would need to compromise thousands of randomly selected validators just to forge one block. That impossible task nonwithstanding, the validators are selected with maybe five minutes’ warning.
PoW doesn’t even offer absolute immutability, it’s just longest fork wins. Which is secure because of the economics, not because of a notion of perfect immutability.
Likewise, ETH2 provides a definition of finality that’s backed by economics.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- vesinisa 5y agoExactly. These PoS FUDers fail to realize that largely the same, even if not stronger, economical factors protect the PoS as does the PoW blockchain. Both fundamentally rely on that 50% of validators need to be honest. With PoW, anyone with sufficient computational resources can execute a 50% double spending attack. I am sure that if few of the largest BTC miners conspired, they could right now execute a 50% attack. That's not in their best interest however, as it would permanently ruin the reputation of BTC and they'd be left with whatever proceeds the attack yielded, but also millions of USD worth of mining equipment that'd be rendered largely useless. With PoS exactly the same works. Most of the holders should be honest, and a successful attack would require spending at least 50% of the market cap of the coin to successfully execute - and then losing that stake as the reputation of the coin is soiled.