Justin Punes, the founder and information managers of the Capital Cyber Capital, sparked a new round of discussion of work proof in exchange for proof of evidence on Wednesday, stressing that Solana’s economic security is now exceeding Bitcoin and ETHEREUM paths only among the largest networks. In a lengthy post on August 13, Bons published accounts on time that, as, as modified, ETHEREUM First, Solana SECond and Bitcoin III based on the “cost of the attack”. “The truth penetrates all the noise and BS novels, where economic security can be measured objectively!” He wrote, adding: “POS, in fact, are safer than the prisoner of war, through several orders in size.”
Solana Bitcoin tops
Bons is framed for him analysis About what he calls the annual “safety budget” required to settle the network. For work proofing chains, he designed the cost of an attack 51 % as a function of miners revenue from issuance and fees; As for the proofing chains, it is dealt with the cost of the attack as a function in the market value, fees and inflation, and is adjusted by the distinctive codes and the attack threshold by 33 %.
At its shot, Bitcoin’s annual economic security reached approximately $ 9.7 billion – “(0.4 %) of its maximum market through its percentage – compared to $ 24.1 billion for Solana” (23 %) “and $ 52.2 billion for ETAREUM” (10 %). His work was published in the line: “For POW, mathematics is the annual security budget, inflation + fees divided on the threshold of the attack (51 %). For points of sale, mathematics are market messages + inflation + inflation divided by the streaming participation rate and then divided again on the attack threshold (33 %).
In addition to the relative classifications, Bons argued that the “security to market value” is the critical lens because “the largest reward, the attacker may be greater than spending.” In this context, it is claimed that proving creativity is not commensurate with the high market value because the costs of the attack with the capitalization, while proof of work depends on external and volatile spending on devices and electricity reflected in mines revenues.
“This clearly shows that I was able as a lower technology than a security perspective,” he wrote, claiming that “even with a significant decline in the market value, ETH & Sol won the BTC security at the present time, unlike” common belief. “
CIO also assigned zero “economic security” to the networks he describes as “evidence of power”, or the name XRP, BNB and HBAR explicitly. “It is based on a different type of consensus algorithm, POA … which, unlike Pow & POS, does not depend on economic security!” books. This position brings back the previous criticism of the XRP governance model.
The Bonns interconnection index undertook an immediate decline and clarification requests. One commentator asked why, if “POS provides higher security when the economic drainage is low”, the dominant narration in the market still treats bitcoin as the best asset. “A spot on! The majority of the market is” wrong “, at least in a relationship with the truth … this will turn when we are more familiar with encryption.”
In a separate exchange, he expected the relative security of Bitcoin to be eroded “until the network is attacked”, unless it changes the revenues of the fees or the path of the path.
Discuss budget budget bitcoin
The broader discussion on Bitcoin’s “Security Budget” this year intensified with the decrease in the release again after half in April 2024. In May, Ethereum researcher Justin Drake warned that the Bitcoin fee market is still smaller than to replace the declining support, and called for proving the work “a time bomb” and that the indication that the fees have slipped to its lowest levels in several years. His argument – which many in Bitcoin aims – about the idea that constantly low fees mean a shrinking budget to deter 51 % of the long -term attacks.
However, the Bonns methodology is far from stable science. Bitmex’s research warned, in examining the “economic cost of attack” in 2024 through consensus models, that “like comparisons” the gap is largely narrowed, and concluded that when the assumptions are unified “, the values are more similar than many, with evaluation systems a little more expensive to attack.”
Critics also object to dealing with the market value as the capital of the spending attack, on the pretext that purchasing a controlling share will lead to raising prices to the top and that liquidity responses, borrowing and governance interviews complicate any fixed model. The “Economic Security” formulas were called in which the “Calls of Delivery” ceiling was called directly in the responses to the Bonns topic.
BONS is a long -standing work defender and whose company describes itself as “the oldest encrypted currency box in Europe”, which was established in 2016 based in Amsterdam, and routinely challenges his Bitcoin Orthodox.
His recent claims – which stipulates Solana before Bitcoin are likely to be able to renew the renovation of what should be, specifically, to be considered the “cost of attack” in heterogeneous systems, and how the dynamic anti -measures, from discounts and social recovery to the customer’s diversity and the design of the fees market, is in the rank of any arrangement that can be deported. The only consensus, at the present time, is that the issue of security – and how to measure it – is competing as being disputed by.
At the time of the press, the Solana Code was traded at a price of 201 dollars.
Distinctive image created with Dall.e, Chart from TradingView.com
Editing process For Bitcoinist, it is focused on providing accurate, accurate and non -biased content. We support strict resource standards, and each page is subject to a diligent review by our team of senior technology experts and experienced editors. This process guarantees the integrity of our content, importance and value of our readers.
The post Solana Is More Secure Than Bitcoin, Claims Crypto Fund CIO first appeared on Investorempires.com.
