Bitcoin Forum
February 28, 2020, 09:03:32 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.19.0.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: MIner Question  (Read 1405 times)
DannyHamilton
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2338
Merit: 1718



View Profile
December 28, 2019, 01:34:27 AM
 #21

Sure, they can do that, but the damage will already be done.
* Currently only 10 major pools to choose from.*

The Powers that could collude 4, could collude all 10.

Two colluding partners is difficult to maintain (since either partner can gain an advantage by first agreeing to collude and then operating outside the collusion).

More colluding partners is even more difficult to maintain.  There is more opportunity for a partner to operate outside the collusion, and more opportunity for the secret to leak.

Even if you could get 10 pools to collude without cheating on each other, there's nothing stopping me or anyone else from starting up another pool.

"I'm sure that in 20 years there will either be very large transaction volume or no volume." -- Satoshi
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1582880612
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1582880612

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1582880612
Reply with quote  #2

1582880612
Report to moderator
1582880612
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1582880612

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1582880612
Reply with quote  #2

1582880612
Report to moderator
1582880612
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1582880612

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1582880612
Reply with quote  #2

1582880612
Report to moderator
gildarts456
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 13
Merit: 1


View Profile
December 28, 2019, 05:04:37 AM
 #22


Two colluding partners is difficult to maintain (since either partner can gain an advantage by first agreeing to collude and then operating outside the collusion).

More colluding partners is even more difficult to maintain.  There is more opportunity for a partner to operate outside the collusion, and more opportunity for the secret to leak.

Even if you could get 10 pools to collude without cheating on each other, there's nothing stopping me or anyone else from starting up another pool.

point is with even 1 pool the network would be relatively safe as the costs for attack would be significant for miners (who could just switch to another pool they make if it's the operator causing issues)

either way miners answer to the users via the market or they lose money they can't recover
Wind_FURY
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 875


Crypto-Games.net: Multiple coins, multiple games


View Profile
December 28, 2019, 07:10:14 AM
 #23

Sure, they can do that, but the damage will already be done.
* Currently only 10 major pools to choose from.*

The Powers that could collude 4, could collude all 10.

Two colluding partners is difficult to maintain (since either partner can gain an advantage by first agreeing to collude and then operating outside the collusion).

More colluding partners is even more difficult to maintain.  There is more opportunity for a partner to operate outside the collusion, and more opportunity for the secret to leak.

Even if you could get 10 pools to collude without cheating on each other, there's nothing stopping me or anyone else from starting up another pool.


The troll discounts the fact that miners/pools/ASIC-producers have a direct long term incentive for the success of the network.

Plus if they were truly colluded, the troll discounts the fact the Bitcoins is composed of people, who can be in consensus to fork the network away from anyone who tries to co-opt the network.

▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█████████████████▄
▄████▀▀▀▀█████▀▀▀▀████▄
████▀██████▀█▀██████▀████
██████████████████████████
▐█████▄███████████████▄█████▌
▐███████▄▄█████████▄▄███████▌
▐██████▀█████████████▀██████▌
▐███████████████████████████▌
▀██████████████████████▀
▀████▄████▄▀▀▄████▄████▀
▀███████▀███▀███████▀
▀▀█████████████▀▀
  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
|
★.★.★   8 GAMES   ★   WAGERING CONTEST   ★   JACKPOTS   ★   FAUCET   ★.★.★
  ▄▄▄
▄█ ▄▀█▄
██ ▄▀██
 ▀▄▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█▀ ▀█▄
██   ██
 ▀█▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█▀█▀█▄

 ▀███▀
  ▄▄▄
▄██▀▄█▄
██▀▄███
 ▀▄▄▄▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█ ▄▀█▄
██ █ ██
 ▀▄▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▄▀▄▄▄▀▄
█▀▀▀▀▄█
 ▀███▀
  ▄▄▄
▄▀   ▀▄
█  █▄ █
 ▀▄██▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█▀ ▀█▄
██   ██
 ▀█▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▀ █ ▀
▀▀▄▀▀
 ▀▄█▄
  ▄▄▄
▄█ ▄▀█▄
██ ▄▀██
 ▀▄▄█▀
|
Khaos77
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 434
Merit: 68

Flag Day ☺


View Profile
December 28, 2019, 04:14:25 PM
Last edit: December 28, 2019, 04:25:35 PM by Khaos77
 #24

Sure, they can do that, but the damage will already be done.
* Currently only 10 major pools to choose from.*

The Powers that could collude 4, could collude all 10.

Two colluding partners is difficult to maintain (since either partner can gain an advantage by first agreeing to collude and then operating outside the collusion).

More colluding partners is even more difficult to maintain.  There is more opportunity for a partner to operate outside the collusion, and more opportunity for the secret to leak.

Even if you could get 10 pools to collude without cheating on each other, there's nothing stopping me or anyone else from starting up another pool.


The troll discounts the fact that miners/pools/ASIC-producers have a direct long term incentive for the success of the network.

Plus if they were truly colluded, the troll discounts the fact the Bitcoins is composed of people, who can be in consensus to fork the network away from anyone who tries to co-opt the network.

Dumb asses such as Windfury, totally fail to understand the damage a short term 51% attack would have on bitcoin,
Loss of confidence would crash the price and destroy profitability of the miners.
No Profit, No Miners, No Bitcoin.

* The only reason some bitcoin miners are surviving now is because of moron venture capitalists,
that keep throwing money at them, that way they hold the majority of newly mined bitcoins off the market. *
But even Moron VCs will eventually run out of money and that will force the miners to unload their bitcoins and crash the markets.
WindFury has proven to be one of the last batch of Greater Fools, new ones are few and too poor to make a difference.

Wind_FURY
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 875


Crypto-Games.net: Multiple coins, multiple games


View Profile
December 29, 2019, 09:12:47 AM
 #25

Somewhere in the troll's post, is part of the answer on WHY anyone who can afford a 51% attack will never dare actually do it.

Plus he discounts the fact that, if an attack was indeed successful, the Bitcoin network is composed of people, the community. There will be damage, but it won't be "irreparable damage". Bitcoin has reached the stage that it can actually do "the honey badger don't care".

Newbies, learn about Bitcoin's basic incentive-structure.

▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█████████████████▄
▄████▀▀▀▀█████▀▀▀▀████▄
████▀██████▀█▀██████▀████
██████████████████████████
▐█████▄███████████████▄█████▌
▐███████▄▄█████████▄▄███████▌
▐██████▀█████████████▀██████▌
▐███████████████████████████▌
▀██████████████████████▀
▀████▄████▄▀▀▄████▄████▀
▀███████▀███▀███████▀
▀▀█████████████▀▀
  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
|
★.★.★   8 GAMES   ★   WAGERING CONTEST   ★   JACKPOTS   ★   FAUCET   ★.★.★
  ▄▄▄
▄█ ▄▀█▄
██ ▄▀██
 ▀▄▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█▀ ▀█▄
██   ██
 ▀█▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█▀█▀█▄

 ▀███▀
  ▄▄▄
▄██▀▄█▄
██▀▄███
 ▀▄▄▄▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█ ▄▀█▄
██ █ ██
 ▀▄▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▄▀▄▄▄▀▄
█▀▀▀▀▄█
 ▀███▀
  ▄▄▄
▄▀   ▀▄
█  █▄ █
 ▀▄██▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█▀ ▀█▄
██   ██
 ▀█▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▀ █ ▀
▀▀▄▀▀
 ▀▄█▄
  ▄▄▄
▄█ ▄▀█▄
██ ▄▀██
 ▀▄▄█▀
|
BrewMaster
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470
Merit: 971


There is trouble abrewing


View Profile
December 29, 2019, 12:34:00 PM
Merited by ETFbitcoin (1)
 #26

^^ the thing about  51% attack is that it can only be considered an attack and also be profitable if it is accompanied by an actual double spend otherwise just replacing an already mined block with a block the attacker mines has no benefits with the same exact transactions has no benefits.

when speaking of profit you first have to factor in the cost. and since the cost of 51% attack is in the millions of dollars the transaction that is being double spent must be worth millions of dollars.

now that we establishes the tx value we have to think of a trade that involves a transaction worth millions of dollars and the other party doesn't ask for a high number of confirmation such as at least 30. such trade does not exist in real world. nobody has ever made such a transaction and only accepted low number of confirmations ever.
with that kind of high confirmation requirement the cost of performing a successful 51% just shot up into billions of dollars instead.

Khaos77
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 434
Merit: 68

Flag Day ☺


View Profile
December 30, 2019, 04:03:05 AM
 #27

Newbies, learn about Bitcoin's basic incentive-structure.

Newbies, ask Windfury how many bitcoins he actually owns,

then ask him how much the New batch of Greater Fools have to buy to make him rich.

Then think for yourself , are their that many greater fools left?
Reasonable people, realize the majority of greater fools brought in at $20K.
It will be a generation , before enough idiots are of age to make the same mistakes as the greater fools of 2017.

Ask yourself, if mining rewards drop , how can miners survive off of transaction fees if Lightning network is to be used instead for the majority of transactions.  Tongue



PrimeNumber7
Copper Member
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378
Merit: 514


Free markets, free people


View Profile
December 30, 2019, 05:49:39 AM
 #28

Somewhere in the troll's post, is part of the answer on WHY anyone who can afford a 51% attack will never dare actually do it.
A potential attacker would need to act economically irrationally to successfully launch a 51% attack, when only looking at the attack in terms of bitcoin.

This means that bitcoin, or crypto in general would need to be an immediate threat to whoever is launching the attack. I don't see bitcoin being this much of a threat to any entity with the resources to pull off a 51% attack.


[ Mix coins ]
 
Your BITCOIN Transaction
made Truly ANONYMOUS
 

███████
█████████████████
████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████
██████████                    ██████████
█████████                          █████████
███████                                    ████████
          ███████                                        ███████        ██
          █████████████████████████████████████      ███
          █████████████████████████████████████  █████
          ████████████████████████████████████  ██████
        ██████████████████████████████████████████
  █████████████████████████████████████████
█████                                        ████████████
                                  ██████████████
██                          █████████████████████          ██       
█████              ███████████████████████          ████       
█████████████████████████████            █████████       
██████████████████                      ████████████         
██████████████████████████████████████       
████████████████████████  ███████   
    ██████████              █████
                      ████████
      ████████████████    █
        ██████████████████
                  █████      ███
                      █████
                    ████

Blender
 
The ULTIMATE BITCOIN Mixer
with an ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
 

███████████     
███████████████████████     
████████████████████████████       
██████████████████████████████       
██████████████████████████████     
 

                                          █████████████
                                          ███████████
██████
                                          ███████████
██████
                                          ███████████
        ██
                                        ████████████
        ██
    ██                              █████████████
        ██
    ████                      ███████████████
        ██
    ██████              █████████████████
        ██
    █████████████████████████████
          ██   
      ███████████████████████████
          ███
      ██████  ████████████████████
        ████
      ██████████████████████████
  ██████
      ██████████████████████████
███████
  █████      ████████████████████
███
████          ████████████████
████ 
████          ████████████████         
████████████████████████


   
█████████████████████████         
███████████████████████████         
█████████    ██    ███    ██████████       
███████████    ██    ███     ██████████         
███████████    ██    ███     ███████████       
██████████████████████████████████       
██████████████████████████████████       
Wind_FURY
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 875


Crypto-Games.net: Multiple coins, multiple games


View Profile
December 30, 2019, 06:36:30 AM
 #29

Somewhere in the troll's post, is part of the answer on WHY anyone who can afford a 51% attack will never dare actually do it.

A potential attacker would need to act economically irrationally to successfully launch a 51% attack, when only looking at the attack in terms of bitcoin.

This means that bitcoin, or crypto in general would need to be an immediate threat to whoever is launching the attack. I don't see bitcoin being this much of a threat to any entity with the resources to pull off a 51% attack.


That "economically irrational attacker" would be wasting resources. The network is made of people, capable of coming to consensus if there was a direct threat.

What the troll said was that the miners could collude. But would they? They would be opening a strong debate for a POW change.

▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█████████████████▄
▄████▀▀▀▀█████▀▀▀▀████▄
████▀██████▀█▀██████▀████
██████████████████████████
▐█████▄███████████████▄█████▌
▐███████▄▄█████████▄▄███████▌
▐██████▀█████████████▀██████▌
▐███████████████████████████▌
▀██████████████████████▀
▀████▄████▄▀▀▄████▄████▀
▀███████▀███▀███████▀
▀▀█████████████▀▀
  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
|
★.★.★   8 GAMES   ★   WAGERING CONTEST   ★   JACKPOTS   ★   FAUCET   ★.★.★
  ▄▄▄
▄█ ▄▀█▄
██ ▄▀██
 ▀▄▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█▀ ▀█▄
██   ██
 ▀█▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█▀█▀█▄

 ▀███▀
  ▄▄▄
▄██▀▄█▄
██▀▄███
 ▀▄▄▄▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█ ▄▀█▄
██ █ ██
 ▀▄▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▄▀▄▄▄▀▄
█▀▀▀▀▄█
 ▀███▀
  ▄▄▄
▄▀   ▀▄
█  █▄ █
 ▀▄██▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█▀ ▀█▄
██   ██
 ▀█▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▀ █ ▀
▀▀▄▀▀
 ▀▄█▄
  ▄▄▄
▄█ ▄▀█▄
██ ▄▀██
 ▀▄▄█▀
|
ETFbitcoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932
Merit: 2212

Use SegWit and enjoy lower fees.


View Profile WWW
December 30, 2019, 10:14:16 AM
 #30

^^ the thing about  51% attack is that it can only be considered an attack and also be profitable if it is accompanied by an actual double spend otherwise just replacing an already mined block with a block the attacker mines has no benefits with the same exact transactions has no benefits.

when speaking of profit you first have to factor in the cost. and since the cost of 51% attack is in the millions of dollars the transaction that is being double spent must be worth millions of dollars.

now that we establishes the tx value we have to think of a trade that involves a transaction worth millions of dollars and the other party doesn't ask for a high number of confirmation such as at least 30. such trade does not exist in real world. nobody has ever made such a transaction and only accepted low number of confirmations ever.
with that kind of high confirmation requirement the cost of performing a successful 51% just shot up into billions of dollars instead.

IMO if someone attempt to make double-spend attack, most likely they would try to fool multiple parties and using multiple identity (e.g. deposit smaller amount of Bitcoin with multiple account on exchange rather than make a huge Bitcoin deposit to smooth the attack).

That "economically irrational attacker" would be wasting resources. The network is made of people, capable of coming to consensus if there was a direct threat.

What the troll said was that the miners could collude. But would they? They would be opening a strong debate for a POW change.

How about scenario mentioned by @BrewMaster?

BrewMaster
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470
Merit: 971


There is trouble abrewing


View Profile
December 30, 2019, 02:02:42 PM
 #31

IMO if someone attempt to make double-spend attack, most likely they would try to fool multiple parties and using multiple identity (e.g. deposit smaller amount of Bitcoin with multiple account on exchange rather than make a huge Bitcoin deposit to smooth the attack).

splitting millions of dollars into smaller sizes is so hard and it also needs to ge as many people involved as the victims. not only finding that many victims accepting such still large amounts is hard but also it means more legal action against the attacker. nowadays with all tracking that is done specially in exchanges it is not easy to get away with that kind of scam.

Khaos77
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 434
Merit: 68

Flag Day ☺


View Profile
December 30, 2019, 03:34:04 PM
 #32

the miners could collude. But would they?

That is the real question.

Miners are already colluding not to 51% attack, because of financial interests.
But ask yourself , what happens when the rewards drop and now they can't earn the majority of transaction fees with bitcoin,
because LN is being used for the majority of transactions.
At that point , their best financial interest will shift to BCH & BSV, as they do receive the majority of transaction fees on those networks,
once that happens, at some point it would be in their best interest to destroy bitcoin/segwit/LN so they have no competition.
And if you doubt the above, ask yourself why their are enough miners keeping BCH & BSV alive, and why they are not letting them die,
after all those same miners are mining btc/bch/bsv  , so thinking they are not preparing to dump btc at a later time is wishful thinking by hodlers that really are not good at thinking.

It is purely the art of war, miners protect BTC until it's profit margin fall, and then they will destroy BTC/LN to place BCH or BSV at the top of the markets claiming they were the real bitcoin the whole time. Problem with people like windfury, he thinks the miners are faith based followers nutjobs like him, the fact is they are cold hard businessmen, and they will sell your ass down the river for fiat profit.
BTC is a product/service , it is not a religion , learn the difference or suffer.




Dabs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2618
Merit: 1395


The Concierge of Crypto


View Profile
December 30, 2019, 05:21:25 PM
 #33

Any attack will be short lived. People will forget about it in a few days and only the affected parties will have something to complain about. Unless of course, the attack is done on a multitude of people or of such a scale that it affects entire groups or populations or accounts.

Again, anyone who actually gets to control 51% would much rather keep the coins mined honestly than risk losing it to some attack they're not sure will have any effect anyway. If I had 60% of bitcoin hashing power, I'd make it look like I had 6 different mining pools or something so no one else knows, and just keep the coins.

squatter
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 1094


STOP SNITCHIN'


View Profile
December 30, 2019, 09:23:48 PM
 #34

A potential attacker would need to act economically irrationally to successfully launch a 51% attack, when only looking at the attack in terms of bitcoin.
That "economically irrational attacker" would be wasting resources. The network is made of people, capable of coming to consensus if there was a direct threat.

What the troll said was that the miners could collude. But would they? They would be opening a strong debate for a POW change.

As PrimeNumber7 pointed out, they would be economically irrational with regard to Bitcoin's incentive system.

That doesn't rule out incentives external to Bitcoin. Let's say the Chinese government simply wanted to crush Bitcoin with a sustained 51% attack. They could systematically co-opt mining farms, threaten pool admins with imprisonment if they don't cooperate, etc.

Not that I think it would be successful long term -- I'm just pointing out a situation where a majority of miners might be incentivized to collude against the network. Indeed a POW change could eventually thwart the attack, but it's interesting to ponder what kind of damage they could do in terms of market confidence and adoption.

Wind_FURY
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 875


Crypto-Games.net: Multiple coins, multiple games


View Profile
December 31, 2019, 05:11:35 AM
 #35

^^ the thing about  51% attack is that it can only be considered an attack and also be profitable if it is accompanied by an actual double spend otherwise just replacing an already mined block with a block the attacker mines has no benefits with the same exact transactions has no benefits.

when speaking of profit you first have to factor in the cost. and since the cost of 51% attack is in the millions of dollars the transaction that is being double spent must be worth millions of dollars.

now that we establishes the tx value we have to think of a trade that involves a transaction worth millions of dollars and the other party doesn't ask for a high number of confirmation such as at least 30. such trade does not exist in real world. nobody has ever made such a transaction and only accepted low number of confirmations ever.
with that kind of high confirmation requirement the cost of performing a successful 51% just shot up into billions of dollars instead.

IMO if someone attempt to make double-spend attack, most likely they would try to fool multiple parties and using multiple identity (e.g. deposit smaller amount of Bitcoin with multiple account on exchange rather than make a huge Bitcoin deposit to smooth the attack).

That "economically irrational attacker" would be wasting resources. The network is made of people, capable of coming to consensus if there was a direct threat.

What the troll said was that the miners could collude. But would they? They would be opening a strong debate for a POW change.

How about scenario mentioned by @BrewMaster?


I already said it, that the Bitcoin network is composed of people. They would be wasting resources. POW change to hard fork the network away from bad acting miners would be strongly debated.

▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█████████████████▄
▄████▀▀▀▀█████▀▀▀▀████▄
████▀██████▀█▀██████▀████
██████████████████████████
▐█████▄███████████████▄█████▌
▐███████▄▄█████████▄▄███████▌
▐██████▀█████████████▀██████▌
▐███████████████████████████▌
▀██████████████████████▀
▀████▄████▄▀▀▄████▄████▀
▀███████▀███▀███████▀
▀▀█████████████▀▀
  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
|
★.★.★   8 GAMES   ★   WAGERING CONTEST   ★   JACKPOTS   ★   FAUCET   ★.★.★
  ▄▄▄
▄█ ▄▀█▄
██ ▄▀██
 ▀▄▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█▀ ▀█▄
██   ██
 ▀█▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█▀█▀█▄

 ▀███▀
  ▄▄▄
▄██▀▄█▄
██▀▄███
 ▀▄▄▄▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█ ▄▀█▄
██ █ ██
 ▀▄▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▄▀▄▄▄▀▄
█▀▀▀▀▄█
 ▀███▀
  ▄▄▄
▄▀   ▀▄
█  █▄ █
 ▀▄██▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█▀ ▀█▄
██   ██
 ▀█▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▀ █ ▀
▀▀▄▀▀
 ▀▄█▄
  ▄▄▄
▄█ ▄▀█▄
██ ▄▀██
 ▀▄▄█▀
|
PrimeNumber7
Copper Member
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378
Merit: 514


Free markets, free people


View Profile
December 31, 2019, 05:18:51 AM
 #36

Somewhere in the troll's post, is part of the answer on WHY anyone who can afford a 51% attack will never dare actually do it.

A potential attacker would need to act economically irrationally to successfully launch a 51% attack, when only looking at the attack in terms of bitcoin.

This means that bitcoin, or crypto in general would need to be an immediate threat to whoever is launching the attack. I don't see bitcoin being this much of a threat to any entity with the resources to pull off a 51% attack.


That "economically irrational attacker" would be wasting resources. The network is made of people, capable of coming to consensus if there was a direct threat.

What the troll said was that the miners could collude. But would they? They would be opening a strong debate for a POW change.
The mining operation would lose money, however a potential attacker would not be trying to be making money via mining, but rather would be trying to profit by harming bitcoin, or maybe would be trying to avoid losses by harming bitcoin.

A potential attacker would be one with a lot of resources, and a lot to lose if bitcoin were to succeed. A potential attacker could either buy up mining equipment, or if it was a government entity, could seize miners physically located within the country.


[ Mix coins ]
 
Your BITCOIN Transaction
made Truly ANONYMOUS
 

███████
█████████████████
████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████
██████████                    ██████████
█████████                          █████████
███████                                    ████████
          ███████                                        ███████        ██
          █████████████████████████████████████      ███
          █████████████████████████████████████  █████
          ████████████████████████████████████  ██████
        ██████████████████████████████████████████
  █████████████████████████████████████████
█████                                        ████████████
                                  ██████████████
██                          █████████████████████          ██       
█████              ███████████████████████          ████       
█████████████████████████████            █████████       
██████████████████                      ████████████         
██████████████████████████████████████       
████████████████████████  ███████   
    ██████████              █████
                      ████████
      ████████████████    █
        ██████████████████
                  █████      ███
                      █████
                    ████

Blender
 
The ULTIMATE BITCOIN Mixer
with an ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
 

███████████     
███████████████████████     
████████████████████████████       
██████████████████████████████       
██████████████████████████████     
 

                                          █████████████
                                          ███████████
██████
                                          ███████████
██████
                                          ███████████
        ██
                                        ████████████
        ██
    ██                              █████████████
        ██
    ████                      ███████████████
        ██
    ██████              █████████████████
        ██
    █████████████████████████████
          ██   
      ███████████████████████████
          ███
      ██████  ████████████████████
        ████
      ██████████████████████████
  ██████
      ██████████████████████████
███████
  █████      ████████████████████
███
████          ████████████████
████ 
████          ████████████████         
████████████████████████


   
█████████████████████████         
███████████████████████████         
█████████    ██    ███    ██████████       
███████████    ██    ███     ██████████         
███████████    ██    ███     ███████████       
██████████████████████████████████       
██████████████████████████████████       
Wind_FURY
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 875


Crypto-Games.net: Multiple coins, multiple games


View Profile
January 01, 2020, 07:02:57 AM
 #37

Somewhere in the troll's post, is part of the answer on WHY anyone who can afford a 51% attack will never dare actually do it.

A potential attacker would need to act economically irrationally to successfully launch a 51% attack, when only looking at the attack in terms of bitcoin.

This means that bitcoin, or crypto in general would need to be an immediate threat to whoever is launching the attack. I don't see bitcoin being this much of a threat to any entity with the resources to pull off a 51% attack.


That "economically irrational attacker" would be wasting resources. The network is made of people, capable of coming to consensus if there was a direct threat.

What the troll said was that the miners could collude. But would they? They would be opening a strong debate for a POW change.

The mining operation would lose money, however a potential attacker would not be trying to be making money via mining, but rather would be trying to profit by harming bitcoin, or maybe would be trying to avoid losses by harming bitcoin.

A potential attacker would be one with a lot of resources, and a lot to lose if bitcoin were to succeed. A potential attacker could either buy up mining equipment, or if it was a government entity, could seize miners physically located within the country.


OK. But first explain how a bad actor could off-set the potential wasted resources from a 51% attack, and would that it be better to profit through honest mining.

▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█████████████████▄
▄████▀▀▀▀█████▀▀▀▀████▄
████▀██████▀█▀██████▀████
██████████████████████████
▐█████▄███████████████▄█████▌
▐███████▄▄█████████▄▄███████▌
▐██████▀█████████████▀██████▌
▐███████████████████████████▌
▀██████████████████████▀
▀████▄████▄▀▀▄████▄████▀
▀███████▀███▀███████▀
▀▀█████████████▀▀
  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
|
★.★.★   8 GAMES   ★   WAGERING CONTEST   ★   JACKPOTS   ★   FAUCET   ★.★.★
  ▄▄▄
▄█ ▄▀█▄
██ ▄▀██
 ▀▄▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█▀ ▀█▄
██   ██
 ▀█▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█▀█▀█▄

 ▀███▀
  ▄▄▄
▄██▀▄█▄
██▀▄███
 ▀▄▄▄▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█ ▄▀█▄
██ █ ██
 ▀▄▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▄▀▄▄▄▀▄
█▀▀▀▀▄█
 ▀███▀
  ▄▄▄
▄▀   ▀▄
█  █▄ █
 ▀▄██▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█▀ ▀█▄
██   ██
 ▀█▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▀ █ ▀
▀▀▄▀▀
 ▀▄█▄
  ▄▄▄
▄█ ▄▀█▄
██ ▄▀██
 ▀▄▄█▀
|
figmentofmyass
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1316
Merit: 1153



View Profile
January 01, 2020, 10:57:01 AM
 #38

OK. But first explain how a bad actor could off-set the potential wasted resources from a 51% attack, and would that it be better to profit through honest mining.

he just explained how:

A potential attacker could either buy up mining equipment, or if it was a government entity, could seize miners physically located within the country.

the government threat is the reason why china's share of the hash rate is concerning. they could take control of all the major mining farms, pools, even the chip manufacturers.

i'm also paranoid about stuff like antbleed (the backdoor bitmain built into antminer firmware) which could play a role in this kind of theoretical attack.

Wind_FURY
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 875


Crypto-Games.net: Multiple coins, multiple games


View Profile
January 01, 2020, 11:19:43 AM
 #39

OK. But first explain how a bad actor could off-set the potential wasted resources from a 51% attack, and would that it be better to profit through honest mining.

he just explained how:

A potential attacker could either buy up mining equipment, or if it was a government entity, could seize miners physically located within the country.

the government threat is the reason why china's share of the hash rate is concerning. they could take control of all the major mining farms, pools, even the chip manufacturers.

i'm also paranoid about stuff like antbleed (the backdoor bitmain built into antminer firmware) which could play a role in this kind of theoretical attack.


Then that's where we might be underestimating the fact that the Bitcoin network/protocol is composed of people. I believe if there was that direct threat from the Chinese government, a POW change is in the discussion.

▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█████████████████▄
▄████▀▀▀▀█████▀▀▀▀████▄
████▀██████▀█▀██████▀████
██████████████████████████
▐█████▄███████████████▄█████▌
▐███████▄▄█████████▄▄███████▌
▐██████▀█████████████▀██████▌
▐███████████████████████████▌
▀██████████████████████▀
▀████▄████▄▀▀▄████▄████▀
▀███████▀███▀███████▀
▀▀█████████████▀▀
  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
|
★.★.★   8 GAMES   ★   WAGERING CONTEST   ★   JACKPOTS   ★   FAUCET   ★.★.★
  ▄▄▄
▄█ ▄▀█▄
██ ▄▀██
 ▀▄▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█▀ ▀█▄
██   ██
 ▀█▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█▀█▀█▄

 ▀███▀
  ▄▄▄
▄██▀▄█▄
██▀▄███
 ▀▄▄▄▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█ ▄▀█▄
██ █ ██
 ▀▄▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▄▀▄▄▄▀▄
█▀▀▀▀▄█
 ▀███▀
  ▄▄▄
▄▀   ▀▄
█  █▄ █
 ▀▄██▀
  ▄▄▄
▄█▀ ▀█▄
██   ██
 ▀█▄█▀
  ▄▄▄
▀ █ ▀
▀▀▄▀▀
 ▀▄█▄
  ▄▄▄
▄█ ▄▀█▄
██ ▄▀██
 ▀▄▄█▀
|
ETFbitcoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932
Merit: 2212

Use SegWit and enjoy lower fees.


View Profile WWW
January 01, 2020, 06:43:31 PM
 #40

Then that's where we might be underestimating the fact that the Bitcoin network/protocol is composed of people. I believe if there was that direct threat from the Chinese government, a POW change is in the discussion.

You're right, but i'm sure you know remember how bad was SegWit discussion was. Multiple hard-fork (with different PoW algorithm) might happen, price crash is inevitable and Bitcoin's security will be questioned if such scenario happened.

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!