Bitcoin Forum

A guy named Chandler Guo (https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100004160466534, https://twitter.com/chandlerguo) threatened Ethereum Classic with a 51% attack:

https://i.imgur.com/XPC1LGi.png

... and it looks like he got some serious equipment (not sure if it's real or not, feel free to check his profiles):

https://i.imgur.com/8Tj2dwG.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/tHSBQFk.jpg

Would that not be acceptable to the ETC defenders? He wouldn't be breaking any rules.

Translation:  It's just a greedy Chinese guy that bought 5 billion GPUs to mine with.  He really doesn't give a flying shit about anything cryptocurrency related and thinks if he can take down Eth Classic then it might increase his mining rewards if there's not 2 Eths.

The hard fork was already condemned by many people, famous in the cryptocurrency space. I also think that it was mistake, but I am nobody.


He can buy them and he did it. I wouldn't judge him.

This is precisely why Proof-of-work has no future except as a bootstrapping mechanism. Miners can fuck network all they please. Miners have to be currency holders, other wise they don't give two fucks about what they mine and what they do with the mined coins. Miners = currency holders only in Proof of stake = responsibility and control over your stake. In proof of work control is in the hands of some sick weirdo thousands miles away, who had used cheap labor to assemble square miles of ASICs crunching numbers. POS is the future with democratic voting, POW is for those who likes to be screwed and complain that they are screwed. Choices, choices.

Disclaimer: I don't own Eth or Ethc and never did.

That guys got some serious equipment there. Gud news he's on the ETH side.

Imagine an institutional investor bought a POW coin, like Bitcoin. A dude in China threatens to fuck around with that investment because he can. Many people wonder why Bitcoin doesn't go to moon. That's why. Because now instead of banks some Guo dude in China controls your money. How is it different from banks? No how, that's how. It can get to the point when it's a matter of national security.

Only Proof of stake lets you manage your money, you own, use and control it.

Why does he have to issue a threat? Why not just go and do it? I do not think he will continue on and do it. Won't it be more profitable for him to also mine Ethereum classic side by side with Ethereum fork?

And where is the attacker of Ethereum? Is the Ethereum fork still vulnerable to the attack he did before?

Those are antminers in the photo, for mining btc. Also, Chandler?

Re: PoS, the problem is nothing-at-stake and stake grinding. You can't get something for nothing. If a large miner wants to try a 51% attack he has to at least expend huge amounts of energy mining a fork, losing income from mining the accepted chain. If a large stake holder wants to attack the network it costs nothing except a few cpu cycles.

The nothing-at-stake myth was debunked long ago, do not FUD please. Oh, maybe you like to be screwed by Guo dude? Enjoy the pleasure.

I know that, but this is him on the picture. You can check his FB profile and see some big farms with GPU's...

Then post a picture of his GPU farm. This sounds like a bluff to me.

Edit Asking people to provide their personal information to the NSA (among others) via Facebook / PRISM is not going to cut it with many here.

lets say he really is capable of doing so.
What would be the consequences for poloniex?

This is not the case if the network (nodes) are decentralized. This is why it's important to keep supporting Core and not bigger block crap that will centralize the nodes and give all power to datacenter node companies and mining companies (that will eventually become the same thing if big block retards were in charge).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncPyMUfNyVM


More in detail.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwjyRAuw6zQ

As we have seen before, PoS can be a total catastrophe. Few holders can decide to rollback and shit like that. Remember NXT? yeah.

PoW is still the most solid way to go about things, objectively speaking.

Bluff or not, in Proof of work what he said is possible. No moon base for POW, sorry.

What rollback? Fyi, Nxt has never rollback the blockchain.

Network, nodes don't matter. 3 chinese miners make decisions in proof of work.

From the history of NXT it didn't roll back anything. A hacker stole coins from Bter, the NXT community voted with their stakes to keep status quo. Rolling back would open a can of worms, like it just did in Eth. They voted with their stakes to keep the chain as is. If you read an alternative version of NXT history, care to provide links?

Seem like he has a serious equipment to do it. Can this be legal that polo can't sue this China man if indeed he really will attach ETC?
I gotta watch this thread for whatever the outcome. if he can attack ETC, what can stop him from destroying the rest.

It appears that he follow us on Twitter, so I'll try to invite him here. :)

EDIT: There you go: https://twitter.com/FAILCommunity/status/757220073337712640

https://i.imgur.com/hahNwl0.png

I know it didn't happen but the fact that it was even proposed is already a disaster. And lol at community, a couple of whales did. And nodes matter, they ultimately validate transactions and dictate what software is being run.

You need to understand how it works before FUDding about PoW and how PoS is so great, watch the videos.

Anyone can propose anything, so what. What matters is what happens, deeds make history, not words.

Instead of videos I'll watch Guo troll POW coin holders.

Too bad Guo can't do shit against a real network like Bitcoin. On the contrary if NXT whales congregate and decide to conspire about something they can pull it off.

Listen I understand you are holding NXT, but PoS is shit compared to PoW, it is what it is. You can still dump all your alts and join the winning (Bitcoin) team.

Thanks but no, thanks. Bitcoin is a losing team. But you can still sell it while going's good before 3 chinese miners have colluded to advance whatever agenda they or TPTB, with whom they are in bed by love or by force, have.

The whole situation is actually hilarious. Worth remembering that pointing all that hashing power at Classic takes it away from Ethereum and makes that network less secure. We are in unchartered territory here. Exciting.

Where was it debunked? Can you link to some manuscript or technical analysis? Who debunked it, iGotSpots? :P

It was kushti from the consensus research group, you can pm him, he will most likely send you the documentation.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=897488.0
Kushti, the guy who works for Charles Hoskinson of IOHK.

Read the first few posts by jonald_fyookball in that thread, like this one:

Towards the end kushti talks about releasing a test chain and tools to attack it with, as well as another paper with some mitigation strategies, but afaics none of those were ever released. I don't think that thread disproves anything, but OK, carry on staking.

jonald_fyookball says he doesn't have the time and energy to digest Kushti's research paper. He's honest about it, he didn't read it.

Towards the end and towards the beginning Kushti's conclusion is the same: long-range attack is not possible.
Short-range is theoretically possible with 10% of all coins for 20 blocks - 20 minutes for full confirmation of the transaction is recommended. Bitcoin recommends 6 confirmations (60 minutes) to protect against short-range attacks. But OK, carry on FUD'ing.

Not trying to drag thread off topic, but where is the experimental blockchain and attack tools that were supposed to be released to demonstrate this practice. Where is the formalized paper?

Another problem is that many (all?) PoS coins suffer from poor distribution, so it's possible one entity owns more than 10% of all coins. Didn't Bter hacker steal like 10% of all NXT? Satoshi might own 10% of all Bitcoin but that doesn't mean he can attack the chain with a single i7 cpu.

As an aside, is the word 'FUD' the crypto equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling, "lalalalala"?

bter hacker end up with less than 1% of the NXT (after the negotiation).
please contact kushti for more information about his stuff.

Did you check the github?
The tools:
https://github.com/ConsensusResearch/MultiBranch
https://github.com/ConsensusResearch/ForgingSimulation
Would you like an .exe file with a big red button "LAUNCH ATTACK" on it?
10% of NXT is 100 million coins. Last time I checked the hacker got away with 8 million coins. FUD'ing is not checking facts or twisting them in your favor.

Why the fuck are u asses discussing nxt crap in this thread. This thread is about guo in the first place. And what he can do with his jerky 98 gh hashing factory if he chooses to target the classic chain. With 51 or more % the outcome will be clear: he'll choose the block to start with and will then start kicking orphans or empty blocks exclusive of legit transactions from all other nodes, and as such soon or late he'll overwrite the original chain with his chain causing the rest of the network to stale forever. Price gets screwed and miners would switch over to the fork chain. What the incentive for spending money and time on this? Well if he shorted he might already have the financial incentives.

First of all, at least from the few rows that you can see clearly, they look like Bitmain S3's. These are of course SHA miners.

As of today, the 51% of the Ethereum hash rate would be roughly 1800 Gh/s. This is about 90,000 GPU's, This is about 15,000 MB's.

Roughly staffing wise, GPU's will need a much larger support infrastructure.

It also is more of a gamble than BTC given the time frame of the transition from PoW to PoS occurrs is currently not known.

We got a PoS with a formal security proof coming out in August sometime. It uses the GKL15 model. PM me if you want a copy of the paper when it's ready.

He talks about attacking ETC not ETH. ETC hashrate is at 5% of that of ETH.

That statistic is changing by the minute (http://ethc.epool.io/#/) - in favour of ETC.

Sure thing because its pumped 20X. Dont forget, attacker still possesses 3.6 million in the darkdao which will be released in a lump sum all at once on 28th of july, and he will certainly have to provide a solid liquidity for himself to cash out.

U cant cash out 3.6 million on bitsquare where it was traded at 0.00013 BTC/ETC and had no bids around there, but u'd rather cash out on thick markets provided by poloniex or bitfinex, wouldnt yall? If we look at how insanely its being pre-pumped, with miners jumping onto the most profitable chain and propelling the hashrate, it all catches on just perfectly.

Doesn't matter. Thats nothing compared to the fact that a chain that was fundamentally promoted for its "immutability" properties has now been demonstrated to be mutable.

The "clean" chain is the valuable one.

ETH is no more than a toy now and will possibly share the same fate as Vericoin. I was amazed that they went ahead with the fork (was amazed at Vericoin as well). Doesn't matter how you square the rights and wrongs it in your head, the market will always take a diversity of views unless you maintain one priority as utterly sacred. You can't simply cherry pick which contracts you want to wipe out and which ones not without paying a strategic price.

You can see pics of his ETH farmS here.

http://www.powtopos.com/

Of course he could just be trying to scare people into dumping at low prices, and will then pump it.  We also don't know who the ETH hacker is, for all we know he could be in cahoots with the miners, or the Ethereum Foundation, or could just be a lone wolf.  There are too many unknowns here and you can't really trust a word from anyone.

We're also assuming the worst of everything, for all we know the DAO hacker could be principled like Satoshi and not sell a single coin.

Fair enough. This at least does have credibility.

https://s31.postimg.org/tbgv9a5h7/Charles_Hoskinson.jpg
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1476057.msg14879996#msg14879996

https://s32.postimg.org/o5lc8wt6d/Chandler_Guo.jpg

Can't we all just get along?
or

Fight!!

I was wondering how big these chinese ethereum farms are, now i got my answer. It says here http://www.powtopos.com/ that this the biggest chinese gpu ethereum farm in china. So if the biggest ethereum farm in china only accounts for 2.2% of ethereum total hash rate with 98G, it means ethereum is extremely well decentralized, it surprised me. I mean, i was expecting there to be cartels with 5-10% of total hashrate, but wow, biggest farm in china just 2.2% ? It's next to impossible to find another ethereum farm as big as this one outside china for obvious reasons.

Quite interesting. So chinese actually dont really bother with eth mining...

I cant find that tweet. Fake or deleted?
Seems weird considering his tweet 8 hrs ago.

You complain of a Proof of Stake's coin Distribution,
Why are you Silent on the Fact that the Country of China controls over 70% of BTC Hashrate, and could 51% attack it on a daily basis for the last few months.

If you think Gmaxwell analogy of Nothing at Stake is an issue , you need to think again.
It is not Rocket Science to see thru this Pathetic Myth.

Simple Fact PoS or PoW
Longest Chain with the Most Difficulty Wins

If you Stake the same coins offline while also staking them online,
you increase the difficulty by the same amount on the Offline chain & the Online Chain at the same time.
Meaning since others are also staking on the Online chain, the Online Chain will always have a Higher Difficulty than the Offline Chain,
Which Guarantees any attempt to overwrite the Online Chain (with Higher Difficulty) with your Offline Chain (Lower Difficulty) will always Fail.
Nothing at Stake Myth Busted.

The only way a history attack can work is if your Offline Chain has a higher difficulty to overwrite the Online Chain, this can never happen , if you are dumb enough to stake on both at the same time, You have to have more coins than the staking % and you have to keep them offline, so you don't use your own coins to block your own attack.   :P

Unlike Asics or GPU Mining Farms which can be used to attack multiple coins,
You have to Purchase each PoS coins directly , meaning it will cost you more Fiat and you will damage your own investment.
( It is the Same as going to an ATM, and withdrawing your Money and then Setting your Money On Fire. )
Smarter Move would be to buy up all of the Coins and then control a Monopoly and set your own price per coin.
Odds are you will not have the funds to accomplish this, because the more PoS coins you buy the more the price grows, and the more others hold.

PoW coins, Miners mine the coin and then sell the coin to pay electricity or asics bills, as their is no intrinsic value to the coin itself, and it will probably lose value,
why is simple, because the laws of supply and demand are irrefutable , if the demand does not keep up with the increase in supply , Price per coin will decrease.
Which is why 3 years ago, BTC hit ~$1200 per coin and has come no where near since.
Any additional Demand is being siphoned off into other coins, which guarantees the older slower BTC never matches it previous glory days.

 8)

FYI:
One last point with PoW coins the ASICS or GPU farms control your coin, without them your coins are frozen.
It is a Simple Class System,  the ASICS Miners are the Masters and the owners of the BTC coins are paying to be their Slaves (as they are completely dependent on them to move their coins around).

Proof of Stake , you are a Free Man Contributing your Stake to keep your Chain running, making you slave to No One.

Freedom (PoS) or Slavery (PoW)  your Choice?

Who says one had to purchase POS coins in order to attack. It is much cheaper to borrow them.

Yeah , I have had this argument with others.
Your so called Margin call attack, which what you guys never bother to read is the fact you have to put up collateral before you can borrow the coins.  
And odds are your attempt will do nothing but make you broke.

If Margin Calls were so easy every asshat would make money doing it, it is just a way for exchanges to lure suckers in and steal their collateral.

But if you want to put your money where your Big Mouth is, I am Game.

I will Bet you 1 Million Mintcoins that you can not destroy Mintcoin in the next 2 weeks.
You have 2 weeks from today's day to put up or shut up.
I chose Mint because they are on Poloniex and that is the only exchange that does margin calls.

So you're game or is that a yellow streak running down your back.  :D

So do we have a bet?

 8)

FYI:
Just to Clarify , you have to destroy Mintcoin to win the bet by August 8th, 2016 using your margin call attack.
If Mintcoins is still up and running, then you owe me 1 million mintcoins.
 
FYI2:
It is amazing how quiet these guys get, when we move into real world examples verses the BS theories in their heads.

FYI3:
Even if you have 1 million $US Dollars for collateral , you would still fail at this borrowing attempt attack.
I will tell you why , if you're dumb enough to bet with me.   ;)

Another option for the attacker is to use Poloniex and trade ETC for ETH since there is a ETC/ETH listing there. After that he can dump all ETH for BTC. This will be bad for ETH because it will bring the price lower. But it is good for ETC because with the attacker's BTC he can buy back in ETC pumping the price.

He has the option to do this as a cycle and keep doing it until he destroys the ETH price. I speculate the motivation of the attacker is deeper than stealing for profit. He is doing this for his own activist agenda. This I fear is what Vitalik does not want to face.

Guys,

The thread is about Guo's statement and Ethereum as a whole, not about NXT, PoS coins or the new Tesla. Some people are already yelling at ETC calling it a scam, but in my views this is the original crowdfunded Ethereum project, so...

Simple truth is that the Ethereum foundation gathered (at some point, depends when/if they sold some of the funds, and the BTC price) over $200 MILLION for 2 projects. One of them is now gone (TheDAO), the other one is outcasted by its original creators. Yes, some people voted about the fork (though I have some doubts on how the voting went....), but they were somehow forced to do so. Its like deposit 2 x $50 in the bank and after some time the bank calls you and says "Come in 5 days to pick a $100 bill, otherwise you are going to lose it.". Maybe I don't want a $100 bill and I don't want to take it after 5 days? Basically, the Ethereum Foundation completely screwed up.

P.S. Would like to remind you that I am not trolling EF, I am just frustrated on how they are doing things so far.

If ETC is a scam, ETH is a scam too. They come from the same parent, two branches of the same trunk. Either they both are scams or both are not scams.

In my view both are legit projects, the Classic branch is more idealistic. There can be more forks in the future. Forking is a standard operation in crypto.

I don't own any of them, my view is not biased like views of those who own one or the other.

Not in something, which claims to be decentralised.

EDIT: If it is a coin with small community, then a hard fork could be convenient.

P.S. I am talking about a hard fork. Bitcoin for example was never hard forked.

What difference does decentralization make in forking a new branch?

Is Bitcoin centralized or decentralized? Why does it matter for forking if it is either and why does it matter what happens in Bitcoin? Every crypto is not obliged to copy Bitcoin's history.

It is called secession. Why should a majority force a minority to stay if the minority has a wish to secede and go on their own fork? Why does this make the minority's branch a scam? It doesn't.
It is hard for minority to secede in political national boundaries. It is pretty easy in crypto, which makes crypto an awesome ground for experimenting of political and economic theories.

You can't gather $200 million to make experiments were there is possibility for failures. They somehow fixed things, but fact is that a lot of people lost money. There are not only coins/assets/platforms/DAO's, there are also tradings. A lot of people bought on higher prices. Forking is always a bad news (when it is made to fix an exploited code), which hurts "investors".

I don't remember there was a promise of profits for everyone and never losses, do you? Take Bitcoin, it is deliberately called an experiment, beta software after 8 years, because it can fail completely. "Investors" are kids who want to get rich quick, well it's not how it works, they must learn or get out of the kitchen if it's hot.

Those millions were "gathered" not for making experiments with underlying tech but for draining them off in the first place. This is how they sustained the fertile ground for moving forward and making this fork possible, in order to conduct the thing under the guise that it was their due diligence to rescue the funds. In reality, I think, the dao was a precursor for deploying a two chain economic model.

Nobody asked you to mine/buy Bitcoin and nobody asked for money to create it.

Asking for money and making an offer to invest in a high risk project with no guarantees are two different things. I didn't read ETH's contract because I don't own it, but were there guarantees of profits? I don't think so even though I didn't read it.
You want guarantees? Find something stable, municipal bonds lol, crypto is very high risk. You know, hackers hack it all the time. You can't have a cake and eat it too. But you kids think you're entitled to both getting profits and no risk, not going to happen.

In case of ethereum, this might be a very controversial statement. I think that foundation did indeed ask for money. Also there were angles playing a high stake game from the very beginning. Where do u think did all those millions of $ invested into genesis come from? Overall it appears that these angel investors were acknowledged about potential gains from the beginning, someone might say that foundation was bound by the legal obligation to develop only for the genuine non-forked chain, so angels had a nice plan for their investment initiative if they were to fund the platform.

You should refrain from such stupid statements (and "attacks"), because of 3 reasons:

1. What do you mean no guarantees? They had $200 million reasons not to make such stupid mistakes (that was (at least in the coders view) a stupid mistake)), which can hurt people's "investments".
2. Who is saying that they must guarantee profits? Is your IQ equal to a room temperature?
3. Kids? I am 35-years old.

It's not controversial at all. The did asked for money, but the guy still tries to compare ETH and Bitcoin.

P.S. I'm not against raising funds, I even approve it. All I am saying that I don't like how they handle things.

When I say no guarantees I mean no guarantees, don't matter if it's $200 or $200 million.
You're 35 and don't know that investing is not safe and there are no guarantees? Keep learning.

I am simply speechless. :D :D :D

It depends on the fork. If you're idea of a standard fork is like what Vitalik did, forking in order to roll back, reverse, tweak or tinker with the transaction history then this should not be a standard operation.

U guys are clearly misguiding the fundamental premise of bitcoin vs ethereum funding.

To sum it up one last time.

Bitcoin from its inception was intended as nothing more than a sandbox for hal and satoshi to send a virtual currency to each other, with no agenda of becoming a store of value or a broadly traded asset. It was a fucking infant in the world of virtual money, and gained adoption because of its irreversible ledger and fairness of distribution thru mining. Everyone had equal or comparable odds to join when the difficulty was low, and could have become a billion dollar fortune dude if had mined enough in the first few years.

Ethereum was thrown at the table as a crowdsale, so people who invested might have reasonably expected a roi and that the core team would continue to develop apps for it, fund it respectively, retain the brand and maintain the appropriate outreach to the community. I agree that terms and conditions advise that u be risk vise and responsible for ur own losses, but at the same time its in the stone that the foundation is liable to prosecution albeit not in all jurisdictions if they choose to screw things up. One thing is u invest $3K in a joke ghetto tech at 50 cents per coin in 2010 because u can and know satoshi doesnt owe u anything, and another thing is when u join a public crowdsale putting some $1000K into ether in 2015, being fully aware that u'll get a sound return.

What this means is that if bitcoin gets screwed by stupid and arrogant decision coming from lead devs all u can do is blame ur tits. If eth gets screwed due to foundations private interests appealing to the community in order to enforce public opinion and game market forces, then its slightly different situation. Foundation should develop software on the original ethereum chain tho, and many might think ETC is the original chain. If u have 1 million eth from genesis sitting in ur wallet, and u support the only original - legacy chain u may start throwing a wobbly here.

ROFLMAO! I couldn't have said it better! ;D But this guy continues to compare Ethereum with Bitcoin.

IMO, Ethereum has always been a pipe dream, as it will not offer enough to make it worth the amount of resources it will draw.

But the Split , will let the fat cats that have been bankrolling it , do the following.

Since they had ethereum coins before the split , they now have the same amount of coins on each chain, and can dump like crazy on whichever chain they decide to no longer support, with 0 loss of coins on the chain they do support.   :P

So who will get ripped off the most, is anyone that buys either fork, until one of the forks dies.
Because due to manipulation,  there are now 2 forks when technically , the longer fork with more difficulty should be the winner.
Since that is no longer the case, how anyone can trust either fork is beyond reason.

 8)


FYI:
We had this in the old days, Remember New Coke verses Coke Classic.
History Proves one of these Forks has to die, anyone buying any before that is just being setup as a sucker.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/30-years-ago-today-coca-cola-new-coke-failure/

Everyone Do not be fooled.

Charleshoskinson is Scammer.
Steal money from Japanese people.

Charles sell at incredible High price 'ADACOIN'.

CARDANO Foundation is Scam company.
charles is Main Partners.
https://cardanofoundation.org/
http://cardano.io/about.html

IOHK is Scam company.

'Attain Corporation' is Japanese Scam company.
charles is Main Partners.
http://attaincorp.co.jp/en/company/

ADACOIN is Japan limited sale
Very strange.

Scam targeting the Japanese.
Look This. Japan only.
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/cardano.io

ADA Lecture Pic.
salesman Charles!
https://www.facebook.com/attaincorp/photos/pcb.465701913622759/465694080290209/?type=3&theater
https://www.facebook.com/attaincorp/posts/463442817182002
https://www.facebook.com/attaincorp/posts/425484124311205

ADA = $1000!

Next The following are plans to sell in ALL Asia.


I Repeat.
Charleshoskinson is Scammer.