Quote from: jl2012 on September 17, 2014, 04:18:06 PM

Quote from: kokojie on September 17, 2014, 04:13:43 PM

Quote from: jl2012 on September 17, 2014, 04:11:45 PM

Quote from: kokojie on September 17, 2014, 04:04:36 PM

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on September 17, 2014, 03:56:49 PM

Quote from: kokojie on September 17, 2014, 03:32:40 PM

I am not the best person to discuss the technical details here, but how do you explain PoW altcoins are easily 51% attacked to death. But then PoS altcoins all avoided this fate, and most of them (the non scammy ones), works and works well. Clearly when put in a equal competition (altcoins), the PoS system came out on top in an equal competitive environment (without early start advantage etc...).

I think we'll see non-clone coins being broken after two things happen:

1. They become valuable enough for attackers to bother, and there is some way for them to cash out.
2. The attackers have some time to do what they need to do to mount an attack-- write code, deploy botnets, hack into some big exchange(s), get their hands on some early-adopter's wallet backups, or whatever.

Once the tools and techniques are developed, then I think we'll see what we see in PoW 51% attacks: attacks against even mostly-worthless clonecoins, because if they've already got the tools then they might just attack for the lulz.

I'm surprised you count peercoin a PoS success-- they're still running with centralized checkpoints, aren't they?

In peercoin 0.4 (current available version), yes still checkpoints. Though Sunny King has stated in 0.5 (future version coming out soon, hopefully), checkpoint will become optional and user can opt out checkpoints. Btw, at least 90% PoW altcoin use checkpoints too, otherwise they get instantly 51% attacked to death. Actually I think having checkpoints in Peercoin is due to the PoW part of the network. Since PoS is now taking over in Peercoin, producing majority of the blocks, checkpoints is no longer needed.

You THINK? Please read and learn the basic knowledge on this topic before you think. I'm quite sure you didn't read the article I cited, or you simply don't care and just want to promote the coins that you have invested in.

Enlighten me then, why is it that when PoS is taking over in Peercoin, and checkpointing is fading out at the same time? I can only form a logical conclusion of PoS don't need checkpointing from my observation.

Btw, am I pumping Peercoin now? lol, I guess if you mention any altcoin in a discussion, you are pumping it...

I have no fxxking connection with PPC's dev. How do I know their intention? You should ask them to provide a reason, not me.

Then there's nothing to discredit my conclusion. The document from Gavin does explain "potential scenarios" where PoS may fail. But still it does not explain why PoS haven't failed in reality, not a single one of them failed, even the scammy ones. Non of them were 51% attacked successfully.

I can think of multiple scenarios where PoW will fail too, and a ton of PoW altcoin has indeed failed due to these scenarios in reality.