Quote from: n0nce on June 15, 2022, 12:05:26 AM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on June 14, 2022, 12:23:47 PM

Quote from: pooya87 on June 09, 2022, 02:56:57 AM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on June 08, 2022, 12:28:18 PM

What would "cost" more, the cost of printing enough fiat currency to buy > 51% of "POS Bitcoin" coins, or the cost of printing enough currency to have > 51% hashing power in the Bitcoin network?

You don't need some hypothetical scenario that involves printing money, we have actual cases that happened in shitcoins that have PoS algorithm in the past like the case with Steem network where exchanges took over the chain simply because they held a large number of that shitcoin without spending a dime.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5387588.msg59383033#msg59383033

That's merely a "young, nacsent" altcoin. I was thinking about a more developed/mature coin, with high market value. As an example, Ethereum, which is going to make the switch to POS.

It makes no difference; it's a general, inherent problem of PoS. It's just as possible on the 'latest and greatest generation X' PoS blockchain, as it is on a 'young / nascent' or a 'developed / mature' PoS blockchain.
The very principle of PoS that the voting power is determined by the amount of coins you hold is the issue at hand.

Quote from: Wind_FURY on June 14, 2022, 12:23:47 PM

Quote from: Dabs on June 08, 2022, 05:32:44 PM

If the world's central banks printed enough fiat currency to buy 51% of the coins, that would imply they are buying at least 10 million coins. Are there that much for sale on the open markets? Attempting to buy it in a short period of time would drive demand over existing supply. We'd see $10m BTC sooner.

What if they will only buy it during bear cycles, and they're willing to take their time?

It's one option; or they might buy it off-chain (buying keys / lending the coins / keys). You can't notice that on-chain and it won't cause price fluctuations.

Bitcoin holders also determine the voting power. Whenever there is a hard fork, if a majority of Bitcoin holders (which receive equivalent of coins on the new chain) decide this is a hostile takeover, they would dump the coins into the market, reducing the incentive of miners to mine on the new chain. So holders also have a big say in what goes on in Bitcoin, but the dynamics between holders and miners make it safer than PoS which is just not safe.