Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on February 16, 2014, 04:59:32 PM

Quote from: giantcrab on February 16, 2014, 04:49:35 PM

below are from the latest Bitshares X whitepaper:

A recent entrant to the Proof of Stake scene is Nxt which claims to be 100% proof of stake and does so with a process they call transparent mining.
With transparent mining the network deterministically selects who gets to produce the next block. If this person is online at the time then they get an opportunity to earn transaction fees. Otherwise a block is produced by the next in line.

The problem with existing proof of stake systems including Peercoin and Nxt is that they dependupon a subset of users that actually choose to dedicate computational power to mining in aneffort to earn income from transaction fees. This creates two classes of users and significantly reduces the percentage of the money supply used to secure the network. Additionally both of these systems suffer from the potential that a large stake holder could perform a denial of service attack by refusing to include some or all transactions.

how do you think the comments about NXT transparent forging?

Seems they r right, we should implemented forging power leasing to get rid of such the issue.

It related to what I said previously here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=364218.msg5034359#msg5034359

How does a node decide which transactions to include? I think the answer is: the node decides itself.

So, when an account leases forging power to a node, what should prevent that node to mis-use that power?