Bitcoin Forum

There have been various discussion on the 51% problem. Quite a few talk about P2Pool or at least some way of doing pool mining that both benefits the miner in regards to more blocks but also ensures that mining is distributed and cannot reach a point at which said pool could perform a 51% attack.

I would like to invite you to submit your idea, suggestion or issue to the following link in an effort to identify how we may move forward and which are the more pressing things to work on.

From this I would like to see some of these ideas built into either the Bitcoin protocol or into the P2Pool codebase to provide a fair, safe and trustworthy way of mining while ensuring the 51% issue never arises again.

http://p2pminers.ideascale.com/ is the site and is open to all for submission of ideas or to vote on existing ideas.

i dont know is it technically possible but my suggestion is
on bitcoin's next version ;
if any pool gains 51% of network it's share will be count as stale or orphan automaticly.
so pool users or admin will try to lower their hashrate by decreasing the number of members or changing their own hardware's pool.
The method for lowering the hashrate of pool is owners job.If he cant succeed pool will be useless.That will cause members to leave the pool.
51% ratio will not be preferable for any pool owner or members, nobody will choose that pool or any pool that have possibility reach to that raito.
 i shared my opinion here cause i am lazy to register an account for just saying these.

There should be a 51% attack.  That would cause Bitcoin prices to temporarily plummet, so I can buy in cheap, then when the price recovers I can profit out and gain lots of money! ;D

i agree, and not only that, but then big players and bitcoin figures would realise that their role must be much more serious.

another view would say that big pool like ghash should simply divide the load on two sides, thus halving their hashrate danger, while having same hash (just split on 2 parts)
i think anything that happens is gonna work just great for most of traders :)

Greed trumps rationale?  ???

If a concerted 51% attack occurs BTC would most likely not recover.  There are other coins that have more resistance to this type of attack.  BTC had adoption working for it, once the safety of decentralization is gone trust would be needed - only fools would trust a crypto backed by some company that mines.  Would you lend BFL, KNC, Cointerra, Hashfast or AMT your entire crypto?

yeah it is about greed.  but most miners do not understand the math of mining so leading them to water is of no use they would not drink it.

Most miners would not want an easy solo mine option   offered from a large pool since they don't understand the mathematics .

If you people would have listened to what I have been saying for the last year and not bought all those damn ASICs, this 51% thing probably wouldn't be a risk now.  

YOUR greed put BTC in this situation!  My greed is just me trying to capitalize on a potental catastrophe. ;D

You do know that last year somebody could have had 51% of the network with just $30 million of GPU farm?  The rush to ASIC was to expand the power-base so that the potential attack from entities such as governments would not occur.  GHash.io's own farm is not close enough to 51%, but the idiotic public miners are pushing it there.  That happened even with GPUs - it was called Deepbit.

Right now a GH is about $1, so $30 million could buy 30PH/s which wold only be 1/5th of the hashrate.  So from a monetary perspective it is harder to do a 51% attack I believe.  But you can't fix stupid  >:(

maybe, the best options here is to push the adoption of this type of attack or to split the hashrate into entities...

coz, u cant beat "greed", u can  only manipulate them

R4v37, you just spammed 15 posts in the mining forum in a row. I know you want to get paid for the sig, but please limit your posts to something constructive.  The above suggestion is anything but.

And, R4v37, don't write idiotic things like "coz".  That makes me think of you as an illiterate 17 year old moron who thinks it is cool to write like that.  It isn't cool, you're just showing your stupidity.