Additionally, convincing people to invest in a ponzi is just one variation of an attack, other variations include convincing 10 % to deposit their stake in your exchange / bank, or taking 10% loans with many profiles , or simply being a large whale that already has 10% or more as is possible with NxT. Why do you act incredulous when these scenario's are commonplace within the crypto ecosystem?
I highlighted the key word for you.
Yes, if you're
simply already owning a stake of a size that never existed in NXT - and you additionally
simply scam yourself into 41% more - and then
simply buy 100% of all that value in shorts, and then
simply gain another 30% so you cover your costs. Then you can attack.
Why did no one think of that before?
The wastefulness of PoW is also a form of security because it incentivizes users to merely profit off of a bear raid and other market manipulation tactics rather than attacking the currency with a 51% attack. The difference with PoS you can attack the currency and profit in doing so and with PoW you have to take a large gamble and spend a lot of resources in order to perform a 51% attack.
Clearly there is zero gambling in your perfect scheme.
You gotta be kidding me. Nothing of your scenario has anything to do with any of those articles - and yes, I've read them before.
Clearly you didn't because you still don't even know what the term "nothing" means.
Does stupidity really know no limits?
Secondly ... come on guys: I buy 51% of a POS, then I buy again 51% of the value as shorts (well, more - as I want to make profit).
You understand that one doesn't need to invest in any of the currency , or control 51% stake when performing a N@S right?
Yes, and in not a single word you said you ever talked about N@S. All the links you provided actually conclude specifically that N@S does not exist, or is not realistically executable.