Ghash.io reached 45%

[Notanon]

They did mention an option they're planning to implement to allow for mining hardware to be directed to other pools. Might use that to finish up mining with Slush's pool and then either go back to them or point them at something else like a Peercoin mining pool instead.

Let's face it, CEX.io and Cloudhashing.com have made mining a bit more accessible for those who don't want to jump through all the hoops of buying and setting up ASICs and FPGAs and end up worrying about software crashes or power consumption. In other words, it's the free market at hand.

[1714760464]

1714760464

[GigaCoin]

They did mention an option they're planning to implement to allow for mining hardware to be directed to other pools. Might use that to finish up mining with Slush's pool and then either go back to them or point them at something else like a Peercoin mining pool instead.

Let's face it, CEX.io and Cloudhashing.com have made mining a bit more accessible for those who don't want to jump through all the hoops of buying and setting up ASICs and FPGAs and end up worrying about software crashes or power consumption. In other words, it's the free market at hand.

yeah but the problem is the current price of their contracts isn't worth it

[BitcoinBarrel]

Since they're already getting close to 51% (let's face it 45% is pretty dang close), I would like to see them implement the feature of choosing your pool. If you purchase Gigahashes, and you really own them, you would think this would be an available option...

Just curious when they plan on allowing users to choose their own pool? When they reach 50.9% of hashing power?

They did mention an option they're planning to implement to allow for mining hardware to be directed to other pools. Might use that to finish up mining with Slush's pool and then either go back to them or point them at something else like a Peercoin mining pool instead.

Let's face it, CEX.io and Cloudhashing.com have made mining a bit more accessible for those who don't want to jump through all the hoops of buying and setting up ASICs and FPGAs and end up worrying about software crashes or power consumption. In other words, it's the free market at hand.

[piramida]

If we're going to make this prototype the gold standard of crypto-currencies, it's going to take more than name recognition + a shitload of miners with tremendous amounts of sunk capital cranking away if the code base itself is lacking in necessary features.  Bitcoin is at risk of becoming that stereotypical gigantic corporation, easily outflanked by the smaller, nimbler competition.  I hope I am wrong.

mining pools are just one of the first steps in the evolution, a cumbersome child of quickly growing difficulty. p2pool would become a mining standard, I think in several years block rewards would be just equally split between all participating miners, without this "lottery" effect of large pools.

[Notanon]

Since they're already getting close to 51% (let's face it 45% is pretty dang close), I would like to see them implement the feature of choosing your pool. If you purchase Gigahashes, and you really own them, you would think this would be an available option...

Just curious when they plan on allowing users to choose their own pool? When they reach 50.9% of hashing power?

Don't know, but if I were them, I'd probably try and hurry up the process ASAP.

[BurtW]

I hope they get up over the magical 50% hump, let say 55% or higher.  It will in no way damage the Bitcoin network but talk about a FUD storm of Biblical proportions!!!

PANIC blood in the streets selling worldwide, everyone screaming 51% 51% 51% at the top of their lungs - none of them with the foggiest idea what a "51% attack" even means or what can or cannot be done by such an attack.

It would be a thing of BEAUTY.  I can see the possibility of a dip into the double digits as the lazy fucking media circle jerk around the story, referencing each other's "research" repeating the "BITCOIN IS DOOMED OMG SKY IS FALLING" story 24/7 all over the web and video.

I can't wait, moving cash into the exchanges and getting ready to buy.

You can do your part by posting as many threads as you can warning everyone of the horrible dangers that a single pool controlling over half of the hashing represents.  Make sure your post contains no actual facts or technical detail otherwise CNN will not be able to use your post and quote you!

[traderCJ]

I hope they get up over the magical 50% hump, let say 55% or higher.  It will in no way damage the Bitcoin network but talk about a FUD storm of Biblical proportions!!!

PANIC blood in the streets selling worldwide, everyone screaming 51% 51% 51% at the top of their lungs - none of them with the foggiest idea what a "51% attack" even means or what can or cannot be done by such an attack.

It would be a thing of BEAUTY.  I can see the possibility of a dip into the double digits as the lazy fucking media circle jerk around the story, referencing each other's "research" repeating the "BITCOIN IS DOOMED OMG SKY IS FALLING" story 24/7 all over the web and video.

I can't wait, moving cash into the exchanges and getting ready to buy.

You can do your part by posting as many threads as you can warning everyone of the horrible dangers that a single pool controlling over half of the hashing represents.  Make sure your post contains no actual facts or technical detail otherwise CNN will not be able to use your post and quote you!

Spoken like someone with no interest in Bitcoin beyond speculation.  Bravo.

[Nagle]

Everyone's concerned about double-spending.  I'm more concerned about them changing the rules to something that nobody likes.

Ghash.io has considerable power right now over Bitcoin. During peak periods, Bitcoin has hit its 7 transactions per second limit. If Bitcoin transaction volume continues to grow, it's going to hit that limit regularly. The block size and transaction rate limit cannot be increased unless ghash.io wants it increased. All they have to do is refuse to confirm blocks beyond the current 250KB limit.

Whenever the block chain has a big backlog of unconfirmed transactions, ghash.io is in charge of Bitcoin. They have the power now to effectively impose higher transaction fees, or favor some transactions over others. For example, Coinbase could cut a deal with ghash.io for "express transaction confirmation" - their transactions get processed first. That would be a win for Coinbase - their merchant shopping cart service needs fast confirmations.

The next big issue for Bitcoin may be "net neutrality".

[BurtW]

Spoken like someone with no interest in Bitcoin beyond speculation.  Bravo.

You must have missed the second sentence:

I hope they get up over the magical 50% hump, let say 55% or higher.  It will in no way damage the Bitcoin network but talk about a FUD storm of Biblical proportions!!!

[Holdaaja]

Only 34% now.

[Holliday]

Ghash.io has considerable power right now over Bitcoin. During peak periods, Bitcoin has hit its 7 transactions per second limit. If Bitcoin transaction volume continues to grow, it's going to hit that limit regularly. The block size and transaction rate limit cannot be increased unless ghash.io wants it increased. All they have to do is refuse to confirm blocks beyond the current 250KB limit.

Whenever the block chain has a big backlog of unconfirmed transactions, ghash.io is in charge of Bitcoin. They have the power now to effectively impose higher transaction fees, or favor some transactions over others. For example, Coinbase could cut a deal with ghash.io for "express transaction confirmation" - their transactions get processed first. That would be a win for Coinbase - their merchant shopping cart service needs fast confirmations.

Ultimately the miners answer to the holders and possible future holders. If the miners (attempt to) do something which the holders disagree with, they will quickly find themselves mining worthless coins. The economic majority holds the actual power.

The next big issue for Bitcoin may be "net neutrality".

I can agree with this.

[traderCJ]

Spoken like someone with no interest in Bitcoin beyond speculation.  Bravo.

You must have missed the second sentence:

I hope they get up over the magical 50% hump, let say 55% or higher.  It will in no way damage the Bitcoin network but talk about a FUD storm of Biblical proportions!!!

1) You don't know whether it will or will not damage the Bitcoin network.  You're just extrapolating based on historical data.  But let's assume you're right for the sake of argument.

2) It's not just the network that is at stake, but the reputation of Bitcoin.  The more crashes we have, the slower people are to adopt it as both a store of value and payment mechanism.  That is why I made my comment.  When Bitcoin crashes, both wealth and confidence is destroyed.

[knightcoin]

Spoken like someone with no interest in Bitcoin beyond speculation.  Bravo.

You must have missed the second sentence:

I hope they get up over the magical 50% hump, let say 55% or higher.  It will in no way damage the Bitcoin network but talk about a FUD storm of Biblical proportions!!!

1) You don't know whether it will or will not damage the Bitcoin network.  You're just extrapolating based on historical data.  But let's assume you're right for the sake of argument.

2) It's not just the network that is at stake, but the reputation of Bitcoin.  The more crashes we have, the slower people are to adopt it as both a store of value and payment mechanism.  That is why I made my comment.  When Bitcoin crashes, both wealth and confidence is destroyed.

and BTW, is pretty much easy to un-link their ISP main cable, as autonomus system. so from 45 tey will drop to ___ dont know just loads of orfans ...

[knightcoin]

Spoken like someone with no interest in Bitcoin beyond speculation.  Bravo.

You must have missed the second sentence:

I hope they get up over the magical 50% hump, let say 55% or higher.  It will in no way damage the Bitcoin network but talk about a FUD storm of Biblical proportions!!!

1) You don't know whether it will or will not damage the Bitcoin network.  You're just extrapolating based on historical data.  But let's assume you're right for the sake of argument.

2) It's not just the network that is at stake, but the reputation of Bitcoin.  The more crashes we have, the slower people are to adopt it as both a store of value and payment mechanism.  That is why I made my comment.  When Bitcoin crashes, both wealth and confidence is destroyed.

and BTW, is pretty much easy to un-link their ISP main cable, as autonomus system. so from 45 tey will drop to ___ dont know just loads of orfans ...

I read https://ghash.io/ghashio_press_release.pdf

But just in case..some contacts has been made in networking community (professionals from layer 3 below)

http://www.internetpulse.net/

http://www.cablemap.info/

[bitrider]

I'm not familiar with the mining side of bitcoin and what the implications are, but it's a little disappointing that one group can already gain 51% so early and quickly... when I heard about the 51% attack I thought that group would need an incredible amount of resource to pull that off which made it very unlikely to happen... but it seems like it is more likely to happen than not. Do miners get benefits for being among the pool in the 51%+ group?

i wouldn't call 5 years in "early", and it has nearly happened before. the main problem is that miners currently (and probably forever) are incentivised to join pools for a more reliable mining income, which is simply one tendency towards centralisation, similar to the tendency towards centralised exchanges (goxopoly) in the earlier years. however, i'm confident that the community as it stands today is both knowledgeable and active enough to avoid the possible crisis scenarios by leaving the pool if you are involved, monitoring the blockchain for suspicious transactions, and promoting awareness through various well-trafficked outlets like /r/bitcoin and these forums. we've shown incredible decentralised cooperation in the past and the entire story of the bitcoin project continues to amaze me as a proof of concept of how dishonest or irresponsible actors can be neutralised in decentralised systems far better than in the centralised ones to which we are accustomed.

--arepo

+1 well said.

edit - and see "anti-fragile"

[knightcoin]

/r/bitcoin

Do you know what, I just realized that I still have some computing cycles since

http://www.distributed.net/Main_Page

just let me review some notes on my ancient books lib...  

[F-bernanke]

Who exactly are the unknown miners? I have noticed they have grown from 15% to 25% recently.

https://blockchain.info/pools?timespan=24hrs

Probably Ghash hiding their hashing power in unknown to not cause panic.

They can cause panic when they have their shorts ready 

[NUFCrichard]

Who exactly are the unknown miners? I have noticed they have grown from 15% to 25% recently.

https://blockchain.info/pools?timespan=24hrs

Probably Ghash hiding their hashing power in unknown to not cause panic.

They can cause panic when they have their shorts ready 

if Ghash are so successful, why aren't clones popping up all over the place to reduce their market share?  I don't really get it.

[porcupine87]

Who exactly are the unknown miners? I have noticed they have grown from 15% to 25% recently.

https://blockchain.info/pools?timespan=24hrs

Maybe they are p2pools?
I saw it, too. GHash and BTC Guild have now together less than 50%...

[im3w1l]

Everyone's concerned about double-spending.  I'm more concerned about them changing the rules to something that nobody likes.

Ghash.io has considerable power right now over Bitcoin. During peak periods, Bitcoin has hit its 7 transactions per second limit. If Bitcoin transaction volume continues to grow, it's going to hit that limit regularly. The block size and transaction rate limit cannot be increased unless ghash.io wants it increased. All they have to do is refuse to confirm blocks beyond the current 250KB limit.

Whenever the block chain has a big backlog of unconfirmed transactions, ghash.io is in charge of Bitcoin. They have the power now to effectively impose higher transaction fees, or favor some transactions over others. For example, Coinbase could cut a deal with ghash.io for "express transaction confirmation" - their transactions get processed first. That would be a win for Coinbase - their merchant shopping cart service needs fast confirmations.

The next big issue for Bitcoin may be "net neutrality".

Or even more damaging, an exclusive express transaction confirmation: "We ghash promise that no competitor of yours will be able to process quickly."