It's about time to turn off PoW mining

[ivonna]

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.

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.

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

[inBitweTrust]

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.

[ArticMine]

Here is the formulation of my attack. The "Second Pirate Savings and Trust" attack on Proof-of-Stake. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=897488.msg10182752#msg10182752.

[inBitweTrust]

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://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=897493.0

 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...

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)

[Rum152]

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://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=897493.0

 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...

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

[achimsmile]

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://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=897493.0

 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...

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?

[LiQio]

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.

[inBitweTrust]

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?

Proof:

Bittrex confirmed his APEX attack.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=686403.msg10169983#msg10169983

[Rum152]

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.

Thanks.

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

[kodtycoon]

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.

Thanks.

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

your sarcasm radar is clearly broken lol

[Rum152]

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.

Thanks.

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

your sarcasm radar is clearly broken lol

The points are valid. IDC if he was sarcastic or not

[Elokane]

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

[BrianM]

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

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.

[Btcvilla]

Lol this is so stupid

[fabiola!]

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

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.

[ensurance982]

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

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...

[crazyivan]

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.

[ensurance982]

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.

Combine them? How would you do that? I don't know... Isn't PoS also difficult to achieve if a lot of coins are in cold storage? I mean how do you prove a node has control over a certain stake?

[Troonetpt]

Yes, PoW mining just waste too much energy, and the most important thing is mining is become a game between rich people who can afford buy the Asic miners. Everyone can mine bitcoin is out of date.

[ensurance982]

Yes, PoW mining just waste too much energy, and the most important thing is mining is become a game between rich people who can afford buy the Asic miners. Everyone can mine bitcoin is out of date.

Agreed. What would you propose instead? PoS mining is even more a game of the rich, since it effectively by definition is the epitome of plutocracy!