Author: Alex Mizrahi 2014-12-16 09:55:50
Published on: 2014-12-16T09:55:50+00:00
The goal is to have an opportunity cost to breaking the rules. However, relying on opportunity cost is rather problematic as it can't work when the system isn't heavily used. Additionally, the system is not secure until it is heavily used, and it isn't heavily used until it is secure. If the expected profit from an attack is higher than the opportunity cost of it, it just makes no sense. The problem is that the total amount of money is much higher than the amount of money being transacted in a short time frame. And if there is a way to attack the whole with a profit proportional to the whole, one won't be able to rely on opportunity cost to prevent the attack. Usually, people say they assume that miners aren't going to collude; otherwise, even Bitcoin is not secure. But this is not the case with sidechains or any merged-mined chains. Once there is a clear incentive, collusion is much more likely. Proof of Burn is considered a real cost for following the rules, but as long as the cost is less than revenue, it is okay.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T14:38:15.355927+00:00