Bitcoin Forum

Excuse me for being new here, but I've been watching all of the threads complaining about deepbit getting too much of the hashing power.

Isn't that a little blatant? If there were evil intentions, wouldn't it be better for Tycho to make 3-4 different pools, run them on different servers and under different names, posting as different names here (or hiring surrogates to post for him), and having them all appear to be independant, so that people think that they are seperate, when they're not?

Wouldn't that be a more effective attack? Would you guys even see that kind of attack coming?

Perhaps you should all be worried about any bunch of pools getting more than 50% of the hashing power as well.

Maybe everyone should mine solo, just to be safe.

You are correct.  All around, it's better to mine solo.

dude no offense to you but your totally missing the point.

no other pool is ANY WHERE NEAR as big as deep bit.

Solo mining is impossible for 95% (or more) of the miners out there.

no one person should have that much control over the hashing power of the bitcoin network

bitcoin is supposed to have no central authority, every single wiki, youtube video, blog about bitcoin says that

but this much hashing power almost creates a central authority and it certainly gives one person way too much control over this network which is supposed to be:


"The peer-to-peer topology and lack of central administration are features that make it infeasible for any authority (governmental or otherwise) to manipulate the quantity of bitcoins in circulation, thereby mitigating inflation.[1]" - wikipedia

well someone with this much hashing power has quite a bit of control dont they?

But it's perfectly feasible for the other pools combined to have 51% of the hashing power (or more), and they could all be ran by the same entity in disguise. They don't need to be as big as deepbit.

if deepbit implements this, I'll be happy to use their pool.
https://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=9137

I'm sure as soon as something materializes most of the pool operators will say no thanks.

I'd be just as easy if deepbit would publish the full blocks on some automated site for archiving.  This way, anyone that was interested enough to check could go look and see if the blocks look honest and if they match what the pool has been working on.

Is something stopping everyone who complains about deepbit from doing this on their own?

Is there any government regulatory body preventing them?

If they did this on their own and offered similiar or better features than deepbit, wouldn't miners move away from deepbit?

That's the thing, it's a free market, anybody can go ahead and actually make this and start a pool that engages in this.

Yes it may be hard to do, welcome to the real world.

Now that's a real awesome idea that might be a good solution.

They can make the pool. The problem is that people won't come flocking to it. The infinite spawn of these threads trying to get anyone at deepbit to move pools at this point is miniscule. Other pools exist and people don't move for lower fees and many other reasons.

I am, and I have been.

Also the >50% attack isn't the only concern. When deepbit was DDOSed recently the network took 50 minutes to find two blocks. That's not the sign of a healthy network.

Yes, it's a free market and people can mine where they choose. But the miner's paycheck comes from Bitcoin having value. If they choose to risk the health of the network for a little bit of variance protection and an instant payout button, well they aren't thinking things through.

It isn't about [Tycho] being evil. He seems like a great guy. But there is simply no reason to we should put so much of the network's hashing power in the hands of one guy. The people who are complaining are simply trying to inform miners of the problem and hope they will self-regulate.

Solution:

Decentralized pooled-mining client monitors individual mining bitcoin clients for solution block finds - only pay out (proportionally to monitored clients in proportion to hash rates minus percentage to client monitor developer) to bitcoin client's who had the decentralized pooled-mining client monitor activated at the exact synchronized clock set time instance when the block was found.

It is also not in Tycho's interest to double spend - as all will know who compromised the network - there can only be one 50% majority entity.  And I also think Tycho is in it for the long run - central authority or not!

I agree, but someone who wants to hurt Bitcoin can exploit Tycho since he already has a large percentage of the network...

Crazy or not consider this. CIA vs. Tycho.

I had the same thought.


If and when bitcoin will become a reliable alternative to centralized currencies, governments will start to be REALLY pissed about it, and they will try to take bitcoin down.

Maybe not CIA, but China, Russia or Pakistan's intelligence agencies are known to be crazy and prone to do crazy things.

either you recognize the security threat of 51% that satoshi wrote in the pdf, and respect btc for its leverage against secretive central bankers

these people actually care for the first option will waste no time in pointing out the first baby-step towards an attack on our baby  ;D

or your just in it for the money and you dont care about the politics of this beauty

I hate to say this, but its really hard right now to convince this bunch of people to move from deepbit. I think the only possible way is something like DDos  :-\

Apparently not.

Started at Deepbit 2 weeks ago when I heard about this...which I suspect the lions share of noobs do...then realized that I was literally throwing 3% down the drain for nothing....okay...2+% if you count the invalid insurance...the only other 'service' that is provided is instant gratification...i see no other...

many people will cite that they 'feel' luckier on Deepbit than other pools....Guess what:  It's because you get a bunch of quick little micro payments; quick satisfying hits that trick you into thinking  you are in wonderland....well a 0.08 reward every hour (avg) is better than 0.02 reward (-3%) every 15min (avg)...and other pools are big enough that the wait between payouts is sufficiently low to make difficulty increases a non consideration.

Get off the noob pool crack and join a 0% fee pool....I've recently switched to BTCGuild...they're at 750GH/s and growing...(so you payout 'fixes' aren't tooo far apart :))

So in short:  It's hard to convince them because they're on crack :)  I kicked the habit...hopefully they can too!  (Maybe we should start some kind of rehab program :))

As I've said in other threads, I mine at deepbit because it is realiable.  Aside from the downtime due to DDOS, I have never had any issues with the pool.  I tried BTCMine, I tried BTCGuild, and both gave me issue after issue with no sign of it getting resolved quickly.

And now the blockchain has been stucked for half an hour on block 129403 : http://blockexplorer.com/

Is Centralization a good thing for difficulty adjustment?  If you DDOS the a 50% mining pool - can you take over the network with half the hash rate?

Yes, these other pools weren't up to handle the flood that came when deepbit was DDOSed. BTCMine is certainly having problems. But BTCGuild is doing great now with a new server up and another about to come online.

Anyway, I mine because I want to earn Bitcoins for securing the network. Giving one guy control of half the hashing power just doesn't jive for me. Mining solo is very reliable by the way.

If you remove the hashing power of a 50% mining pool, you need less hashing power to double spend, correct. If you DDOS 6 major pools, you need even less. If six pools go down at once, watch the network struggle as people realize they have no clue how to solo mine. Hopefully it doesn't happen.

There are easy and effective failover methods in the case of your primary pool going down...I don't see this as any reason to mine at Deepbit...IF Deepbit is more reliable (which is seriously in question considering the previous DDOS and the pending(?) DDOS's to come) then it makes a perfect SECONDARY failover choice if my free, 0% fee primary pool does happen to go down.

Next argument please.

Yeah..solo is reliable alright...but makes absolutely no sense unless your Hashes are high enough to win you at least 1 block in under two weeks or so...otherwise the difficulty changes without you having won anything and your your earnings are seriously eroded...this above all else is why pools exist...well that and the crack effect I have alluded to..

I agree with everything you've said. If the pools could be brought down, people who can solo mine will still be able to earn Bitcoins and secure the network!   :D

Solo mining should be a tool in every miners toolbox.