You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Impressive ideas from Craig Wright, Bitcoin is Turing complete
I think of it like this, the secure information system has any security at all based not on how much hashing power but based primarily on the incentive structure. It's a game theory problem, not a technical (hashing power) problem, and because the problem is framed as some sort of technical problem, people seem to think that making the mining rigs cheaper is somehow going to change the security.
Based on what game theory?
Which problem you are talking about? You think that there is a security issue?
And mining rigs are becoming cheaper as the is technology evolving. How much hash per $100 you can get now compared to 3 years ago?
My point is if you want security to be in the amount of people who participate then you're moving security to the edges. The truth is, if you have good economic incentives then the behavior of the participants will at least in theory conform to protect the security of the network because it will be in their best interest to do it.
Mining isn't really going to ever be decentralized on the level of everyone being a miner is my point. That is a false possibility in the first place. I'm not sure anyone seriously believes grandma will be mining Bitcoins on her smart phone along with billions of people in developing countries. We have to at least be realistic about what is likely to happen and that future is extremely unlikely.
In my opinion the security of Bitcoin is based on the structure of economic incentives, not the amount of hash power miners generate or how many miners there are. You can have security with Proof of Stake greater than Bitcoin no matter what the hashrate of Bitcoin if the Proof of Stake has a better incentive structure.