[bawolff]

Instead, it can be attacked simply by purchasing a lot of compute.

For a smaller chain, purchasing a lot of compute sounds easier than hacking everyone's keys. Not to mention if you can hack someone's private key, surely you can hack their server farm

(Fwiw, i think both have a similar level of risk, its just coming from different threats)

[runeks]

> Instead, it can be attacked simply by purchasing a lot of compute.

Firstly, no one is offering for sale enough compute to attack e.g. Bitcoin.

Secondly, and more importantly, this would be a temporary attack, during which the blockchain in question is rendered unusable. Once an honest majority of hashing power is reestablished, everything is back to normal. But a compromise of a majority stake is a permanent compromise of a chain. No honest actor can conjure up more stake to gain an advantage over the attacker who now sits on a majority.

[sph]

> Instead, it can be attacked simply by purchasing a lot of compute.

It’s easier to accumulate a lot of money than to accumulate a lot of hardware and building a nuclear plant to literally outcompete the rest of the world, no? And at that point you are no longer invisible, so the rest of the world could simply decide to ignore your monopolistic contributions to the blockchain altogether and fork.