Quote from: versprichnix on February 08, 2019, 11:52:38 AM

For example, a miner with 50% hashrate mines only half of the expected mining reward. A miner with 90% of the total hashrate would mine only a tenth part of the normal expected mining reward. I believe it would dezentralize and stabilize the hashrate, but I cannot say, if it is technically solvable.

No, it's not technically solvable. You have the right idea, but you're touching upon the deep problem of forming a consensus which is the core of keeping cryptocurrencies out of central control. POW achieves this goal only if you're the largest coin for the type of equipment being used for the coin, so that miners are forced to not attack the coin so that their equipment remains profitable and worth something. Hashrate is automatically stable because they don't have something else to mine. In effect, the miner's equipment investment becomes their stake in the coin. If they attack, their stake loses value. Keeping the staked equipment / non-staked equipment ratio above 50% is the source of POW security which is how good POS systems works. There's no way to stop 51% of the miners from colluding to take value from the other 49%. So POS and POW work by making the miners put up a stake and have that stake at risk if they hurt the coin, so it does not matter if they collude because it does them no good. I'm working on a coin design to use this and other ideas. Most POW+POS are centralized instead of putting the stake at risk.

zawy

Posts

Merits