[ANN] [CTD] [SHA-3] CateDoge!Time warp patched! v1.3, Rapid transactions

How about considering future coin developments such as POS?

I am not convinced of the goodness of Proof Of Stake. Don´t you think it reduces/eliminates the privacy? Even I have read it is not secure.

"5) Other individuals may prefer the privacy associated with dropping out of participation. These individuals are still welcome to use the network, but must face a wealth tax of 5% per annum to compensate for the security risk created by their behavior. "https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_Stake

And other problems could arise:
"I think Andrew Miller put it best: "The trouble with Proof-of-stake is that there is nothing at stake."

Consider the basic function of proof-of-work and the blockchain: together, they let the network come to a consensus when there are two (or more) different, competing chains.

Miners must decide to dedicate their hashing power to just one chain-- they cannot "bet on" more than one. So their best strategy is to work on the chain that they think most other miners are working on, and that quickly drives the system to a consensus on a single, best chain.

The trouble with proof-of-stake is there is no natural incentive stopping a miner from assigning their stake to multiple, competing chains. If you try to create such a system, you "go meta" -- you started by trying to solve the transaction double-spend problem (which proof-of-work and the blockchain handle nicely), and end up trying to solve a proof-of-stake double-spend problem."
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1oi7su/criticisms_of_proofofstake/

I am not an expert on this matter but I don't like PoS.

There are some good criticisms and there is also evidence that POS combined with POW can make the blockchain more secure from such things as 51% attack.... however I take your point that there may be security and privacy issues with POS.

My comment was rather to prompt conversation and discussion about POS and if it is right to consider it for this coin. For example EBT has a combined POS / POW scheme and appears to be doing well out of it even though it is Scrypt. There, up to now, has been no issues with security etc.

I was just thinking that POW with POS should not be ruled out for the future.... but with correct discussion, research and evidence of security.

Proof of stake is actually a good way to prevent 51% attack. Plus it makes a coin more scarce and valuable in the long run. Even if it's down for sometime. Intensive work of hashing over years wastes a lot of electricity. Couldn't think about it before.

Read this, by Anonymint:

"The other attacks you describe all derive from the fundamental reason I declared all non-proof-of-work systems to be insecure back in April.

My logic was mathematically fundamental. The input entropy set is quite deterministic and well known and thus can be preimaged. For example, accumulating a lot of coin-days-destroyed and then targeting them in clever ways to subvert the security.

The randomness (entropy) of each proof-of-work is fundamental and mathematical and it can not be preimaged. It can only be surely defeated with > 50% of the network hash rate. Note I recently offered what I believe to a solution to the selfish-mining attack (the one at hackingdistributed.com that claims 25 - 35% attack).

I am skeptical that you can characterize all possible attack vectors of proof-of-stake in one coherent mathematical proof. Thus you will not know formally what the security is; instead a list of adhoc attacks and counter-measures."

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=354573.msg3805632#msg3805632

is there a successful forking of any pos coin through an exploit or vulnerability in pos system?
Like when we talk about 51% attack. it is understandable that the person with more than anyone else can modify the code at x block height and fork the thing. What I still don't get is. How does a 51% attack convince nodes to continue to fork blockchain? Like theoretically it sounds old. Let's say if someone forked the chain. now there are 2 chains, chain A and chain B. Chain is the "official" blockchain. Everyone including exchanges, and less than 51% of community is mining on old chain. How does chain B (the forked chain has its use?). Can't we all just neglect it and nothing would happen? And eventually people mining on chain B will also figure out (in a day or two) and will move mining power to chain A?