This attack requires a large % of a coin's stakeholders to be stupid enough to trust 'Pirate S+T'. Why don't you call your bank cryptodouble instead of Pirate S+T? I think cryptodouble is a catchier name, might get more suckers. In the accumulation phase, you are 100% operating a ponzi. How do you convince people to invest in the ponzi (I know, tell them it's not a ponzi, you instead intend to attack the currency)?
Explain why you can't do the same with a PoW coin? Just needs the added measure where you buy hashrate with your accumulated funds, but you would require much less funds. What % of bitcoin, what % of litecoin would it take to buy enough hashrate to attack? What % of a PoS coin would it take for you to attack that
What happens if your attack doesn't reduce the value of the coin to zero? Does your attack merely consist of double spending?
All these questions have been answered in the previous page. 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?
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.
I'm incredulous about it being easy/cheap to get 10% of a stake of a well functioning coin. If you can get 10% of a stake without buying and want to profit from it, the easiest way is not to give back the 10%, and sell the coins on the market.
If you have the resources to get 10% of a PoS coin, often the price to buy enough hashrate to control a PoW coin is much less than 10%. I don't see how the incentives are drastically different. Usually owning a coin gives more incentive to not damage the coin than owning hardware does. For example, say bitcoin falls more, and lots of bitcoin mining rigs get shut off. Someone who doesn't own any bitcoin, and has lots of unprofitable bitcoin miners could just launch an attack at very low cost. Maybe put money on some shorts on bitfinex to offset the cost of electricity while attacking.