Re:On the Instability of Bitcoin Without the Block Reward [pdf]
by ajkdhcb2 on Wednesday March 03, 2021 @11:04AM
(#26330194)
It seems very simple to me. The network would be controlled by custodians including exchanges and banks. And under an attack the network would be over: the malicious stakers can basically pay themselves and suffer no cost to continue the attack. Conversely with PoW there is a sustained huge expense to continue to perform an attack, and the PoW can be changed by a fork. I would never consider this to be acceptable. Not that ASICs run by China aren't currently an abysmal situation either, but that is only a problem because bitcoin has no privacy
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:On the Instability of Bitcoin Without the Block Reward [pdf]
by DennisP on Wednesday March 03, 2021 @08:28PM
(#26337429)
Malicious stakers could not reverse transactions without losing their stake. It's as if a 51% attacker in PoW got their mining rig burned down.
Malicious stakers could indefinitely conduct a censorship attack. To address this, the PoS equivalent of changing the hash function would be to fork the chain and leave out the attackers' stake.