Hybrid PoW/PoS wouldn’t change that.

in pure PoS a government or organization can buy coins and manipulate the gain without spending large resources

The cost of attack is cheaper in PoW than it is in PoS.

if PoS suffers an attack, it’s game over

Not in the case of the finality layer proposal from Luke Parker

It’s true that some of the staking will be done on centralized services but that’s no different to how mining pools centralized hashpower. I don’t know GhostDag but I’ve heard that Nano is not really secured. Most blokchains that have experimented with DAGs at some points, have walk back to a more classical blockchain (Avalanche for instance). I’m not saying consensus based on DAGs data structure can’t be an option but classical blokchain + PoS have been a lot more battle tested. DAGs are still a bit exotic as far as I understand.

“Long-range” and “nothing-at-stake” attacks are theoretical attacks that have never impacted a blockchain that correctly implement PoS.

• Complexity: That’s an engineering problem. Users care about security, the complexity of the engineering is irrelevant to them.
• The rich will be more rich: Every staker would earn the same APY. This is only a issue for PoS blockchains that have had unfair distribution. Also parameters matter, PoW will still be rewarded.
• Long range attacks and nothing-at-stake: No blockchain have been impacted by those. You need a correct implementation and hybrid PoW/PoS prevent long-range attacks anyway.

By the way, why would you delete your post (which has for effect to make it invisible) rather than explaining your reasoning and why you changed your mind?

I see that this post was linked to the Monero sub reddit then deleted by the author after just a few hours. (self)censorship is going strong over there lol…

https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/1mlvaaf/responding_to_criticisms_of_a_hybrid_powpos/

This argument often comes up to claim that PoS would be less secure than PoW but let’s examine it closer.

Hashpower can also be bought and if you think about it would be cheaper to buy 51% of the hashpower than 51% of the XMR supply. CPU price would not increased as much as XMR price as the attacker attempt to buy enough resources to reach 51%. Plus, it’s easier for Monero holders to mount a counter attack as staking takes two clicks of a button while running a miner is more cumbersome.

Running an effective 51% attack like the one ran by Qubic is a lot cheaper than attacking PoS. The attacker needs is to create a bogus blockchain with manipulated supply and market it well to incentivize the miners well enough. The attacker doesn’t risk his own capital in the attack (since he’s a seller of XMR not a buyer).

Again, Qubic isn’t even a state sponsor attack. It’s conducted by a new and small project and it has been successful at creating enough panic to see the price of XMR dropped significantly. With this in mind, how can you justify that PoW on Monero would be more secure than PoW/PoS considering that the XMR supply has been, as you said, fairly distributed from the start.

It’s been repeated so much that Monero will never adopt PoS that to many it’s inconceivable that PoS becomes one day part of the security mix but this Qubic’s attack will certainly force us to reconsider this stance.

By the way I don’t know if Aaron Day has commented on the reasons for choosing Zano for it point-of-sales system but I bet that fast finality was a key factor in his decision and honestly it makes sense. You can’t have a serious in-person payment solution being widely adopted with unpredictable, long finality times. Now if we want to stick to online payments only, fast finality isn’t as important but we have to be honest about the limitation of PoW for the digital cash use case.

A benefit of PoS that is relevant to the Monero use case is that it would allow faster finality times. How do you implement sub 5s finality with PoW? You can’t… If there is a use case for which fast finality matters is certainly in-person payments. I think this is a drawback for Monero that isn’t being discussed enough.

There has been many chains (I’ll take eCash - XEC as a model, fork of BCH that implemented the avalanche consensus) that have successfully implemented a hybrid PoW/PoS approach and I think exploring this for Monero would make sense. One of the big concern with PoS is coin distribution especially for crypto that had a pre-mine. That’s not a concern that Monero will ever have. PoW is still important to guarantee that the blockchain can be retrieved in a trustless manner. PoS has by design a trusted setup.

Let’s take the best of both worlds and make Monero a better medium of exchange that it’s already is.

We now have evidence that this photo had been tampered with. We already knew that this photo can’t be from the second shot as Trump has his right hand on his ear when we hear the supersonic shockwave of the second shot. Also, we don’t see any trace of blood on Trump’s hand whereas we do see traces of blood on Doug Mills’ third photo (which has likely been tampered with as well anyway). However, this photo doesn’t appear to be from the first shot either because when we hear the supersonic shockwave from the first shot Trump still has his right hand on the stand! In short, this photo can’t be from any of the shots and we must conclude that it had been tampered with (which I had hypothesized from the beginning).

What does this all mean?

If a forensic evidence supporting the official narrative of the failed assassination attempt had been faked, we can easily entertain the idea that more forensics evidences could have been faked hence the staged assassination attempt hypothesis is highly likely. See the screenshots taken during the first supersonic wave and second supersonic wave. You can verify for yourself with the live footage here: youtu.be/JW3X-nmHKmM

First supersonic shockwave (Trump’s hand on the stand):

Second supersonic shockwave (Trump’s hand on his ear):

Doug Mills bullet photo (hand in the air):

This is deductive reasoning unless you want to contest the law of physics. Are you suggesting we have another case of “magic bullet” in which the bullet suddenly changed its direction mid-air?

The bullet goes from left to right and has a descending trajectory so not inconsistent with the official story. That said, based on this trajectory I don’t see how the bullet could have grazed the upper part of Trump’s ear. Maybe that’s why the FBI director refused to state that Trump got it by a bullet in front of the Committee.

I gave up on Reddit, the best is to be active and grow alternatives like monero.town

After taking a closer look, some pictures of Trump shows that he had some blood on his right hand. Not that it’s all over but that’s certainly how he could have perceived it. That said the recount of the event is clearly scripted as he describes scenes he couldn’t have seen.

Thanks for the moralistic discourse but I’m good. You seem to be assuming a lot of things about me. It’s true that being aware of some dark realities of this world can make an individual fell into extreme paranoia hence it’s important to always exercise critical thinking when doing this type of research. I could also go on the register of the pathos and tell you how about people who died because they blindly trust the official narrative but I won’t go there.

Trump recounts the event: “And moved my right hand to my ear, brought it down. My hand was covered in blood. Just absolutely blood all over the place”.

As per the video footage when Trump gets up, there is absolutely not a drop of blood on his hands. False memory, gross inconsistency in the narrative or did the secret service took the time to clean his hand?

What’s interesting is that a lot of the elements recounted by Trump are not from his perspective at the time of the event. For instance, he says that as he was still on the ground, the crowd was pointing at the shooter and people could see all the blood. This doesn’t seem like an authentic recount of the scene by him. Someone else wrote this script for him, but the deep state should be careful not hiring interns next time.

See at 2:25:

https://youtu.be/4MVep85ykg4

Magicians use the power of attention and misdirection to successfully execute their magic tricks.

Have you noticed how Trump said “take a look” five times to direct the attention of the public to the chart just before the shots started?

Maybe this explains why we still don’t have any footage from crowd that was behind Trump. Maybe all eyes were focused on the chart. That’s too bad because it may have help us settling the question as to whether or not a bullet grazed Trump’s ear.

An interesting analysis on the Trump assassination. The author claims that there were three shooters. Crooks on the roof, one on the water tower and one somewhere in the woods. The author uses his analysis to support the thesis that it was a failed assassination attempt. According to him, Crooks’ bullets couldn’t have grazed Trump’s ear (based on the angle). The shooter on the water tower would have been the one responsible to graze Trumps’ ear while the third shooter wasn’t aiming at Trump but at the SS sniper instead. However, this third shooter missed and hit people in the bleachers instead. While all of this is possible it still doesn’t exclude the possibility that none of these shooters aimed at Trump. It’s also curious why one shooter would have aimed at one SS sniper while more SS snipers were positioned at other locations. Also it would mean that all three shooters missed their target. Another question is that if we had three shooters, and only one (or maybe two) got neutralized, why would the third shooter not go for another assassination attempt as Trump was walked to his car? The plot thicken but we still don’t have a definitive answer on whether it was a false flag or a real attempt.

https://rumble.com/v57dfwl-brave-tv-ep-1821-john-cullen-breaking-open-the-trump-assassination-attempt-.html

If we were living in a world of no conspiracy and didn’t have evidence that Trump is to some extent owned by deep state actors, you would have a point. But how to not ask for a high level of evidence when we’ve seen in recent years many horrible but proven false flags/conspiracies? As far as I can tell, there is so far no evidence that this event could not have been staged hence, I’m not going to change years of research leading to my understanding that:

1. This type of false flag could absolutely have taken place
2. Trump is owned by many elements of the deep state and the narrative that the deep state is after him doesn’t make a lot of sense

Of course those who haven’t realized point 1 and 2 will go for the most obvious explanation which is that this was a failed assassination attempt.

More info on this photo:

Did you know that the photo of the bullet in the air behind Trump was taken by Doug Mills, the same photographer who took the photo of Bush in a classroom when being notified that the 9/11 attacks just happened? It seems that this renowned journalist is often at the right time in random places just before major historical events unfold. He’s a lucky one.

I don’t know if this photo is real or had been modified or even taken at an earlier day in a controlled environnement but it’s an interesting coincidence.

Also, it’s unclear to me if the trajectory of the bullet which seems mostly parallel to the ground is a realistic trajectory for a shoot fired from an elevated vantage point.

Also, we still haven’t seen a detailed animation showing the trajectory of the bullets based on the shooter’s position and Trump. How likely it is that those would have been lost bullet killing and injuring spectators?

Hard to tell without a precise animation but intuitively I would think that lost bullets would have been more likely to hit the ground around Trump than the crowd by the simple fact that the shooter was at an elevated position in comparison to Trump.

Good to know about ATP. I don’t use it much (I can’t even create an account).