I worry that such simile might be a bit confusing.
The biggest complaint I have about the proof-of-stake is that any jerk with lots of capital can instantly get enough importance in the network.
In fact, both PoW and PoS faces the same problem inherited from the real capitalist world, the more capital the more control over the network.
Yes, there are several flavors of it now, each project have their own tweak to be more robust against Sybil attacks… so I would like to know on what aspects in particular do you find a comparison with PoS.
My first impression when I first heard about the SafeNetwork (after becoming early adopter of PoS in projects such as peercoin, NXT and NEM) was that it made it invulnerable to the types of manipulations that PoS could face.
There is no way to automatically gain any advantage over the network just for having an inordinate amount of money stashed. There is the sigmoid curve that also discourages single mega servers, so even single actors who wants to be full time farmers wouldn’t gain any influence on the network as they would need to break down their vaults, each of them being lost in the xor space.
At that time SafeNetwork was the only project I could find that seemed to be impervious to economic and political attacks.
So from my perspective, I don’t see the similarity between PoS with the SafeNetwork.
You might as well say that PoS is like PoW, just because it validates blocks, but it really isn’t it, is it?