Quote from: kjn311 on April 01, 2015, 04:50:17 AM

Quote from: mortified on April 01, 2015, 01:52:19 AM

Quote from: fordlincoln on April 01, 2015, 01:34:33 AM

Quote from: mortified on April 01, 2015, 01:22:00 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on April 01, 2015, 01:16:57 AM

Quote from: mortified on April 01, 2015, 01:10:53 AM

Quote from: CanaryInTheMine on April 01, 2015, 01:01:04 AM

Quote from: Mashuri on April 01, 2015, 12:42:17 AM

Quote from: mortified on March 26, 2015, 01:12:02 AM

Using Proof of Stake will end up with Masternode stakeholders owning a lot of beach front property.
Edit: Proof of Stake will allow large Factoid holders to vote on the conversion rate. They will make it prohibitively expensive to buy entry credits. Wealthy attackers can create counterfeit entries and cause genuine entries to be ignored by consensus. In other words, Proof of Stake is not a good consensus, especially for property. Wealthy factoid holders will collude to attack record systems of valuable real estate. This has already been done in countries that have gone to computerized real estate bookkeeping. It would be better to not avoid Bitcoin's consensus approach. Proof of Work offers stronger protection from such attacks.

This. A thousand times this. Attacking POS is economically more feasible than POW.

I'm not sure I completely understand your points... But want to point out that Factom is secured by Bitcoin which is PoW

Entry credits are a fixed value. Perhaps they are hedged Bitcoin contracts, but they are purchased with a floating value Factoid that uses Proof of Stake. Bitcoin hedge contracts expire and become volatile over time, so either you will have to secure with holding bitcoins or create new contracts using Factoids. FACTOM claims that you won't be using bitcoins.

Do you have a like on this Factom thinks ppl won't be using Bitcoin idea?

They expect people to go from USD to Tether to Factoid maybe?

Likely. It would be better to use a Tether approach and transition to a Lightning Network 'hub and spoke' model.

Factoids are using a protocol to transact on Bitcoin's PoW network, but it is true that Factom will not be using 'bitcoin the currency'.

Entry credits are like IOU's in the Factom network, a fixed value against the floating value of Factoids.

Factom has its own consensus model which is explained in the whitepaper here: https://github.com/FactomProject/FactomDocs/raw/master/FactomLedgerbyConsensus.pdf

Thanks for that white paper link. It's worse than I thought. Federated and Audit servers are also able to attack. Don't get me wrong. I still like the idea. They just need to get over the 'Bitcoin currency is Bad' mentality because all they are doing is opening up the system to more attack vectors with each layer of abstraction and trust. The entry credits can migrate from IOUs to payment channels. The fundraising model will still work to get it up and running. The Federated servers can become hubs and Audit servers will become viable businesses in themselves.

Do you have a link to the idea that Factom think ppl won't be using Bitcoin?

It's not that Factom doesn't use botcoins, it's that users won't have the private keys. Factom claims that users won't need bitcoins in their video.. I presume the federated servers and FACTOM hold the bitcoin private keys.