Proof of Stake systems are proven to be more secure, and cost a lot less (nearly nothing).

Why would they unplug the machine if they could still extract value out of the Bitcoin eco-system? As long as they could earn more than electricity cost, they will mine and sell in hope for ROI. They will only unplug if electricity cost > mining income.

Miners didn't buy high, they have invested in the hardware already, they will sell at ANY price in hope for ROI. Also electricity bill has to be paid, miners aren't going to pay these with additional funds out of pocket.

What's the point of publishing the key afterwards? the stake is already gone, you can't attack with non-existent stake.

So far you have presented me zero proof of your claim, so I would just have to take it as a rumor then. Your argument is therefore invalid, because you have created yet another imagined scenario that doesn't exist in reality. I know you have a vivid imagination from prior discussion.

How do you sell 51% stake in an eco-system, and then attack it? I don't see how that is even possible. The selling alone would take months, and would alert the community already. Your theory is a imagined scenario, that can not be done in reality, that's why it has never happened in reality.

What is so hard to understand? Bitcoin currently spends $500 million per year on PoW mining, so without inflow of new capital, the price of Bitcoin will perpetually decline, due to value being sucked out of the eco-system by PoW miners.

Again you have to give me more detail, links maybe? I'm not aware of any plans to devalue stakes.

Not sure what you mean, you'll need to talk in more detail how is this an attack on their own currency, how do you know with certainty that something is a false benefit, while stakeholders believe otherwise?

There's nothing to stop a well funded and determined attacker to attack Bitcoin's PoW network in the same fashion, it's still only cost 10% of Bitcoin marketcap to attack. That's extremely cheap compared to buying 51% stake in a PoS eco-system.

You will never read about that scenario happening, because no one is dumb enough to buy 51% stake in an eco-system, then proceed to destroy their own stake and wealth. It's like burning your own money. Well if you do, then the rest of stakeholders would thank you for it, you just made their stake 100% more valuable by destroying your own stake, because the attacking stake will soon be blocked by community consensus and rendered unusable forever.

On the other hand, with the PoW mining farms, nearly nothing can be done to stop them from attacking any PoW network that they can overwelm with their hardware, as you already seen in the death of many PoW altcoins.

Not completely wrong, confirmation time will be slowed until the next difficulty adjustment. If the adjustment is drastic, confirmation time might be slowed for over a month. This slowness of confirmation time is well observed among altcoins, sometime they go months without a single confirmation due to sudden drop from high difficulty to nearly no difficulty.

The same thing will happen to Bitcoin, if for example the price suddenly drops to $10. PoW mining has many weaknesses like these.

Did you get anyone to actually believe your nonsense? why would localbitcoin trade at a difference price? everywhere I see, the localbitcoin price pretty much follows the exchange price. Because if localbitcoin trade at a different price, buyers would just go buy on a exchange, instead of paying 25% more to buy at your imagined localbitcoin price. Also if your localbitcoin price of $400 is true, then sellers would just buy at exchange at $310, and go back to local and sell at $400, which will soon equalize the price difference due to the arbitrage. Therefore, it's impossible for localbitcoin to maintain a price 25% more than exchange price.

How hard is it to understand DPoS is an implementation of the PoS concept? come on, even someone like you should be able to understand DPoS is a subset of PoS?

You don't even have to listen to me, since Daniel Larimer says so himself:
http://bitshares.org/delegated-proof-of-stake/
read: "This paper introduces a new implementation of proof of stake"

Therefore, you are just confused, and your question "Did Bitshares change from DPoS to PoS?" doesn't make any sense, since Bitshares is a PoS system, and more specifically a DPoS system. Just like Bitcoin is a currency, and more specifically a crypto-currency. Do you understand now?

Then your virus scanner setting must be wrong, don't scan all files, just executable files.

Actually just the contrary, PoW miners has ZERO skin in the game, they don't need to own any Bitcoin to mine the Bitcoin PoW network, they are not stakeholders of the Bitcoin eco-system. They could easily switch their ASIC machines to mine something more profitable, if the opportunity exists. All they are interested in is sucking value out of the most profitable eco-system, to enrich themselves (miners/pools/hardware vendor/electric companies)

PoS miner are by definition, stake holders in the eco-system. The bigger the miner, the bigger his stake in the system, and therefore the bigger the interest to protect the system. This is why naturally, PoS eco-system has never been attacked, even the tiniest PoS altcoin has not been successfully attacked. Because no one is stupid enough to destroy their own stake and wealth.

DPoS is a subset of PoS

Thanks for reminding me why you are on my ignore list, you like to blatantly lie about PoS facts to suit your own argument. Even when I already told you, a pure PoS system, like Bitshares, has no checkpoints, you still lie about PoS needing checkpoints.

Now yes Peercoin has checkpoints, but they are fading out checkpoints now too, just as they are fading out PoW and having PoS taking over the network, coincidence? why don't they need checkpoints for PoS? oh yes, because ONLY PoW network needs checkpoints.

Checkpoints are basically insurance policies, no PoS network really need it, but some PoS altcoin implemented it just to be safe. Unlike smaller PoW networks, that basically requires checkpointing to even have a chance surviving against the rampant 51% attacks.

You don't get it, there's no bottom. There's a perpetual PoW mining expense that is sucking value out of Bitcoin. As long as no new money coming in, Bitcoin will perpetually fall in value. So you better wish there's new money coming in to boost the price.

Nope, just the contrary, PoW relies on centralized checkpointing, Bitcoin has checkpointing. PoS does not need centralized checkpointing because it's so hard to attack it, Peercoin is now fading out the checkpointing, because PoS has taken over the network, and PoW is fading out. BitsharesX, a pure PoS system, has no checkpointing.

NAS attack against a PoS system is pretty much fictional. When I asked why it haven't happened yet in reality, Gavin's reply was basically "people might not have figured out a good way to attack or built the tools to attack it yet". Well I'll believe it when I see it, so far I haven't seen it happen in reality, though you are welcome to change my mind, go initiate a NAS attack on a PoS system, see how far you could get.

I could attack any smaller PoW altcoin right now, with just a handful of ASIC machines. The weakness of PoW security is PROVEN, and exists in reality. All the PoS attack theories are UNPROVEN, and doesn't exist in reality.

So I'm not sure why Bitcoin is sticking to a proven insecure system, with $500 million current annual expense. But not adopt a system that have no security issue in reality, and has nearly no expense.