Quote from: tromp on Today at 10:15:28 AM

[...]

In PoW, there's a significant percentage of uncertainty. For example, you can't know for sure what will be your earnings in the future. You don't know if it's in favor of you to sell the ASICs or to keep them for yourself. On the other hand, in PoS, you know exactly the coins that suit you and you're not going to sell them unless one appears who's willing to pay you at least your future earnings.

Therefore, one owning the 1% of the computational power is more likely to vanish than one owning the 1% of all the coins in circulation.

Quote from: LegendaryK on Today at 09:20:32 AM

Two: Not avoiding , but ignoring since in the earlier post I showed the majority of coins are PoS based. (Which means their developers share none of your concerns.)

This is false. They very much do, which proves you haven't actually read my writeup.

Vitalik, summing up that there's sacrifice in security:

Quote from: How I Learned to Love Weak Subjectivity

Because of all the arguments above, we can safely conclude that this threat of an attacker building up a fork from arbitrarily long range is unfortunately fundamental, and in all non-degenerate implementations the issue is fatal to a proof of stake algorithm’s success in the proof of work security model. However, we can get around this fundamental barrier with a slight, but nevertheless fundamental, change in the security model.

Quote from: LegendaryK on Today at 09:20:32 AM

Until then as a pronounced PoW supporter, don't be surprised that PoS developers/users simply ignore your concerns.

I don't care what they do. I created this thread to share my thoughts.

Quote from: LegendaryK on Today at 09:20:32 AM

Kind of the same way all PoW supporters ignore that only 3 or 4 mining pool operators could 51% attack bitcoin at any time over the last 5 years

This problem exists in PoS systems too. There are much greater whales in Cardano than in Bitcoin.

Quote from: LegendaryK on Today at 09:20:32 AM

No matter what happens with PoS, a world wide ban of PoW mining before 2030 is very probable, and that is a very real danger not imagined conjecture.

You can't realistically stop PoW, by banning it. There'll always be people who'll have access to computational power and therefore, can always use it to mine cryptocurrencies. Besides, isn't it already proven that the majority of the hash rate comes from renewable sources?

Quote from: vjudeu on Today at 12:08:23 PM

On the other hand, in PoS in the same case, when someone will have 51% of the coin supply (that can be unknown, because someone may have many wallets), it is impossible to compete, even in theory.

The attack doesn't have to retain; if one ever reversed a transaction x blocks deep, the game theory would have failed. The moment they did, Bitcoin would have lost all its value. Economically-wise, a 51% is easier in PoW, but that's unless there's a terrible wealth distribution which happens to be the case in most cryptos.