Some guy threatens ETC (Ethereum Classic) with a 51% attack

[pereira4]

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.

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.

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?

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.

[1714180841]

1714180841

[1714180841]

1714180841

[1714180841]

1714180841

[freshman777]

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.

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.

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?

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.

[pereira4]

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.

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.

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?

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.

[freshman777]

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.

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.

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?

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.

[Divinespark]

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.

[jwinterm]

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.

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

[Sebastien256]

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.

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

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

[freshman777]

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.

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

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

[jwinterm]

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.

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

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:

I don't have the time/energy to fully digest what the paper
is saying, but the conclusions of the author seem to say that
Nothing at stake is a real problem that hasn't been solved.

As we have all the algorithms developed to simulate N@S attack we
present result in the separate paper along with possible ways to resist it.
Giving some results now we present not the full picture of the problem. Fol-
lowing this section it is reasonable to get the impression that this problem
actually matters and we concentrate to possible solutions at the moment....


...The open question for the future work are: (1) the PoS consensus depen-
dence on the measure function (2) the ways to avoid N@S attack if any (3)
the optimal confirmation length investigation (4) the optimal multibranch
depth investigation.

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.

[freshman777]

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.

[jwinterm]

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"?

[Sebastien256]

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

[freshman777]

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"?

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.

[synthgauge]

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.

[64dimensions]

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.

[charleshoskinson]

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.

[synthgauge]

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.

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

[toknormal]

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

That statistic is changing by the minute - in favour of ETC.

[synthgauge]

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

That statistic is changing by the minute - 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.

[toknormal]

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.

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.