This would only make the blockchain more resistant, 51% attacks practically impossible, Firo for example has implemented this, what would be the disadvantage?
- Monero should be in circulation and used. Not to be staked by investors.
- The Nakamoto Consensus is well understood and simple. Increased complexity would always come with a larger attack surface.
PoS has two main problems: (1) It makes the blockchain less resistant. (2) the Cantillion Effect. With PoS, all it takes to do a 51% attack is to have enough XMR.
If you look at the existing financial system, you can regularly see the big players openly sabotaging themselves to either kill competition or push down prices to cause a panic and then silently buy back more than they had sold while people are still panicking or just because they are subsidized to do so (e.g. DEI). With XMR’s antagonism to the existing financial system, PoS would be a death sentence. PoW + PoS changes little since you can just game the algorithm so the PoW doesn’t matter.
The Cantillion Effect is essentially, people with wealth get more and more power over time to game the system because they have wealth (PoS) and not because the did anything to deserve that wealth (PoW). It’s the whole reason why the financial system is the way it is now and XMR should have no part of it.
@g2devi @XMRbutterfly @monero PoW doesn’t guarantee that wealth is deserved, because computing power can be bought too. It’s a bit harder to buy than tokens, but that doesn’t change the big picture.
Monero should stick to PoW, though, because it works. It didn’t work for Firo, apparently, so they had to change it, but I am not aware of any 51% attacks on Monero.
PoW means you’re doing work to support XMR, so any XMR you get from mining is deserved. Yes, bigger entities have an advantage in doing more work, but so do off-grid mining with cheap/“free” energy in cold climates. It all balances out.
With PoS, the more you have, the higher your validation rewards, and the higher the rewards, the more you rewards, the more you have, which leads to even higher validation rewards. This rapidly leads to a few players dominating and the rest of the people fighting for crumbs at an accelerating rate. Plus since the big players are the only ones getting rewards, the little guy has to stake with the big players, increasing the profits for the big players (hooray for capitalism!). However, if there is any slashing, the penalties are spread to all the little guy stakers (hooray for socialism!). This leads to a situation that encourages big players to go for a 51% attack since if they succeed, they get wealthier and if they lose, their losses are absorbed by everyone else.
This can happen in PoW too (see Blackrock and Michael Sailor), but even there having a lot of the coin does not give you more power, only doing the PoW, so the growth is slower and the extra XMR doesn’t give you more power over XMR. Having a tail emission like Monero does should be enough to ensure that eventually no matter how much you have, it will be diluted by what’s yet to be mined.
Monero has always been open to improvements in principle. However, security and privacy come first. try Zano
how would it make it more resistant? what is a 51% attack. we don’t know what you mean
