bitcoin's doom is not 51% attack, it's 99% attack

[Hyena]

If a government can manufacture a train full of tanks:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PTfF6wmqcU

Then it can easily manufacture a train full of ASICs. This won't be a 51% attack, it would be 99% attack.

Prove me wrong.

[glendall]

I hear governments only order ASICS from BFL.

So you're wrong about your predictions.

[Hyena]

The government invented NASA and the Mars mission. Producing its own ASICs would be a piece of cake for them.

[glendall]

Ok on the serious side of things, your premise is still pretty weak.

First of all, if the U.S banking cartels aka government wanted to kill bitcoin, buying a bunch of ASICS would be one of the more challenging methods.

Second off, you can't even buy enough ASICS currently to do what you propose, in any sort of reasonable time span.

Third, developing their own would be difficult. Okay let's say it's possible.

They would just mine all bitcoins -- what use would this have?  

A 51% by the government could be seen and avoided.

I dunno. Could go on but I think it's a silly premise.

Easiest method would be merely just buying all bitcoins and crashing the market. But I don't see how the gov would be interested in doing so. It is far more feasible that the powers-who-be in the gov would instead just find a way to manipulate BTC for the monetary gain of the few people who would be making such a decision.

Besides even if the government did so the 'crypto cat' is out of the bag. A new coin would immediately be made and gain traction. The government moves to slow to counter the aims of a motivated, technology saavy population.

[dg2010]

The government invented NASA and the Mars mission. Producing its own ASICs would be a piece of cake for them.

They invented Nasa? Seriously stfu because you are making us all dumber by reading your bullshit.

[bam91]

It is a United States government agency is it not?

[antimattercrusader]

I don't think invent is the word you're looking for, but yes.

I imagine a huge ASIC attack would be possible, but:
1. Why?
2. The government can't agree on anything. They would have to agree to attack, I doubt there are two people in the entire government than can agree on a single thing.

[master-P]

That's why we have BBQ coin, just in case things go south with BTC

[nkspace]

yes i the government wanted to get rid of bitcoin they can, easily

[antimattercrusader]

That's why we have BBQ coin, just in case things go south with BTC

At least BBQCoin can provide tasty treats.

[antimattercrusader]

yes i the government wanted to get rid of bitcoin they can, easily

If they REALLY wanted to, they could. Unless another government supported it. YOu have US with ASICS and CHina with ASICS... 49% 49% and then 2% eveyone else. Nothing changes. Except network hashrate. lol

In reality, I don't think the government wants to destroy bitcoin. Maybe an element within the government, but no the entire government.

[Qoheleth]

They would just mine all bitcoins -- what use would this have?  

A 51% by the government could be seen and avoided.

I dunno. Could go on but I think it's a silly premise.

Easiest method would be merely just buying all bitcoins and crashing the market. But I don't see how the gov would be interested in doing so. It is far more feasible that the powers-who-be in the gov would instead just find a way to manipulate BTC for the monetary gain of the few people who would be making such a decision.

If you have enough ASICs to dramatically outvote the network, and want to make Bitcoin unusable, a double-spend is only one tool in the toolbox.

If it was me in charge of the NSA's secret "Kill Bitcoin" project, here are some tricks I could do with a significant majority of hashpower:
1) Split the blockchain. Allocate enough hashing power to both sides such that they stay within 6 blocks of each other. As soon as the miners/devs/&c seem to come to a consensus over which chain to trust, split that one. Continue until there's tens of branches, each with similar blockheights.
2) Have a front deposit a large amount of BTC in major exchanges and sell them. Reorg the blockchain such that the deposit never happened. If the exchanges switch to the new chain, withdraw your free money and/or sue for securities fraud. If the exchanges stay on the old chain, you've just killed an exchange.

[Brushan]

When a guy in China gets funded from an internet forum and starts building ASIC's in his basement (ASICMiner) and now has to watch out NOT to get 51% of the hash power then it's not very hard to imagine what a government can do. In the future it will be alot harder, but right now, it's not even something to think about. Of course they can take over the network by mining.

[Hyena]

I'm so glad that some of you actually provided me the valuable opinions that I was looking for.

In this context one should not think of the government as it is described by its traditional definition. I was rather referring to entities such as the illuminati and/or reptilians.

So, now we can agree that such superpower would easily disturb the bitcoin network if it wanted to, possibly rendering it useless.

Therefore, I hereby speculate that proof of stake crypto currencies are superior to proof of work. Having said that, I'm looking forward to buying more PPCoins and maybe even NVCs in the near future.

[smoothie]

When a guy in China gets funded from an internet forum and starts building ASIC's in his basement (ASICMiner) and now has to watch out NOT to get 51% of the hash power then it's not very hard to imagine what a government can do. In the future it will be alot harder, but right now, it's not even something to think about. Of course they can take over the network by mining.

You forget that having the knowledge about bitcoin and how to administer an ASIC isn't common knowledge. Otherwise we would have 20 ASIC vendors already.

[Brushan]

When a guy in China gets funded from an internet forum and starts building ASIC's in his basement (ASICMiner) and now has to watch out NOT to get 51% of the hash power then it's not very hard to imagine what a government can do. In the future it will be alot harder, but right now, it's not even something to think about. Of course they can take over the network by mining.

You forget that having the knowledge about bitcoin and how to administer an ASIC isn't common knowledge. Otherwise we would have 20 ASIC vendors already.

Yes i know, and i don't think a government will do it. I don't even think it will be possible in a near future. But if they started assigning resources to it right now? They would probably be able to do it within 2 months.

[Anon136]

we would just switch from sha 256 proof of work to something else.

[antimattercrusader]

That would suck for all the legit ASIC miners.

BUt not for me and my GPUs 

[Hyena]

I was thinking that maybe it would be possible to make an altcoin that has its proof of work algorithm randomly changing so that it would be impossible to make an ASIC for it.

[Qoheleth]

I was thinking that maybe it would be possible to make an altcoin that has its proof of work algorithm randomly changing so that it would be impossible to make an ASIC for it.

Technically troublesome.

If the parameterization isn't fundamental enough, the ASIC could simply be built to take those parameters. If the parameterization is too fundamental, it's hard to prove that every algorithm which comes out of the randomizer is cryptographically strong against partial preimage attacks.

An intriguing idea, though.