On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 3:33 PM, Tao Effect <[email protected]> wrote:
> Speaking of unsupported assertions, that "the merits of proof-of-work > [are] debatable" needs to be substantiated with something, especially if > you are comparing it to pre-PoW concepts. > Systems that use a Bitcoin-like proof-of-work function are both: 1) Monumentally inefficient 2) Vulnerable to an attacker who wins the proof-of-work lottery most of the time, like has recently happened to Bitcoin <http://www.coindesk.com/ghash-io-never-launch-51-attack/> Compounding this problem is the desire to prevent key compromise in Bitcoin-like systems via the use of multisignature trust and trusted third parties which sign-off on certain operations. This approach centralizes authority, in which case a consensus-based system like Ripple with trusted gateways could be used instead. If it were, it'd be much more efficient, and arguably have better security properties. -- Tony Arcieri
_______________________________________________ Messaging mailing list [email protected] https://moderncrypto.org/mailman/listinfo/messaging
