<c​haser:monero.social> AFAIR IOHK's Ouroboros papers (Kiyaias et al.) are full of theorems that analyze a blockchain construction from this perspective. there should be something about equivocation too, because they claimed to have "economic safety" without slashing.

<c​haser:monero.social> I see value in various finality layers for various use cases, e.g. merchant payment processing. I'm doubtful that a slashless construction could allow the safe reduction of the lock depth. it doesn't offer strong guarantees about future behavior.

<k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> If we can get a supermajority of hash power to agree to only descend a specific block, we can reduce the lock.

<k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> "various finality layers", if discussing simultaneous application, don't help.

<k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> Serai maintains its own finality layer for all ext networks and ensures we don't reorg/have a net split. That ensures Serai never reorgs and never becomes insolvent on reorg. It still risks Serai adopting and only honoring a minority hash power chain.

<k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> The only way to prevent services from being at risk of so dying out is network-wide agreeance on a finality value.