I have an idea for a change to proof of stake, just wanted to hear opinions.

So in my concept, you would have a set of validators. In order to choose who would make the next block, you would simply run a pseudorandom function on the previous block that would produce an integer, and that integer could be used to select the block producer. For example, say Bob, Alice, and Tom each own a third of the stake. If the pseudorandom function produced an 8 bit integer, then if the number is between 0-85, it would be bob, if it's between 86-170 it would be alice, and if it's between 170-255 it would be tom.

Because there is only ever one validator who can produce a block, there would only be on "true" chain. All you would need is to agree on the original block in the chain, which could even just be hardcoded into the software.

​

One issue would be if the block producer selected goes offline, who makes the block? If you just run the pseudorandom function again, but add a nonce to it, then an attacker could just do that until they select themselves.

​

So, instead, you would make it computationally hard to find the next block producer if one has gone online. Perhaps Sha256 the previous block hash 100000 times (or however many times is needed to make it take a while). If an attacker wanted to make a fake chain, they would have to do this for each and every block, which would take an incredible amount of electricity and time.

​

Is something like this already planned on being in Casper? Do you think this is a good idea? Does this have many flaws?