The same thing that prevents dishonest bitcoin miners from rigging the blockchain to say that coin X went from A->M instead of A->B.
As long as there are more nodes who would not benefit from this particular rigging as there are nodes who would, everyone can act in their own self-interest and the outcome would be correct.
> The same thing that prevents dishonest bitcoin miners from rigging the blockchain to say that coin X went from A->M instead of A->B.
Oh, so it has a built-in mining subsidy that miners are rewarded with? Because without that bitcoin suffers from an even worse version of the exact same problem and is not incentive compatible.
> As long as there are more nodes who would not benefit from this particular rigging as there are nodes who would, everyone can act in their own self-interest and the outcome would be correct.
What counts as a node? Can I spin up a million or a billion nodes on AWS and influence the vote that way?
proof of stake seems to be hardly an answer to the problem. And maaku seems to be pointing out that proof-of-work WITH SUBSIDY so far has worked, but without subsidy the dynamics are quite different.
As long as there are more nodes who would not benefit from this particular rigging as there are nodes who would, everyone can act in their own self-interest and the outcome would be correct.