Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: Proof of stake instead of proof of work
by
jabo38
on 21/05/2014, 10:30:44 UTC
DaT,

The NXT genesis account's pass phrase is well known.  (The first line of 1984.)  I wonder if a person could use that account that held 100% of coins and create an alternate chain?  

I am also a little curious about this 51% attack thing.  It has been explained that because not everyone is supporting the network, a person might only really need 10% of coins to take over a chain.  Please help me think this out.  To do this, I think there are only two options.  The first is a group of the original stakeholders, would have to meet and agree they would sell all their coins, and then try to attack the chain.  As of now, while most original stakeholders have sold a lot, they still have a ton, so much in fact that they can't really sell it all without completely crashing the market.  If it was crashed, then there is no point in trying to attack it with a double spend, right?  In fact, the whole action would be entirely against their self interest.  They would have to sell all their coins at rates far below what they would have gotten if they slowly unloaded.  The net profit in successfully pulling off the attack would actually be a huge net loss compared to acting more rationally, wouldn't it?  

Yes, it is possible for a a group or person to do a 51% attack, but is it realistic, even at 10%?  Right now for a person to buy up even 10% of NXT would be, $4,000,000 and that is IF they could buy it at market value, but to buy that much would surely cause a huge spike in price as the buyer would be buying out all the sell walls, and new walls would go up at even higher prices.  So in reality it would be much much higher than $4,000,000 to buy 10%, and then said buyer would have to offload their 10% which would cause a huge huge drop in price, probably crashing it to next to nothing.  All this so that they could try to double spend a few coins when now the market is basically bottomed out.  Does this make sense or am I missing something?

In either of these two cases, wouldn't huge red flags go up to the community, and that in itself, just knowing a person could double spend would make the price drop.  I remember with bitcoin one mining pool came close to 50% and the community went crazy.  

BTW, this thread is awesome.  hahaha