Pool Ops are now the Alt Currency Police

[bitlane]

As a precedent has been set by Luke Dash Jr, now every pool operator can be an Alt Chain police officer and attack any new Alt that they see fit, using their entire pool to do so, with or without the knowledge of the miners that belong to their pools.

Luke took it upon himself to 'Police' an Alt Chain and kill it, by using the hashing power of his pool to 51% attack it.

Should we all look forward to these types of attacks on new projects if/when a self-richeous pool op get's his panties in a bunch ?

How do pool miners feel about having NO SAY or CONTROL over what an Op does with YOUR HASHING POWER ?

Just to be clear.... Luke Dash Jr is an idiot.

[1714034163]

1714034163

[1714034163]

1714034163

[bitlane]

I would love to hear (or read) from a miner at Eligius pool and how THEY feel about having their hashing power used for something they didn't consent to or agree with ?

[Luke-Jr]

Why do you assume the pool miners had anything to do with this?

[ssateneth]

Why do you assume the pool miners had anything to do with this?

Probably something along the lines of merged mining. In any case, I don't care, as long as I get my bitcoins.

[koin]

As a precedent has been set by Luke Dash Jr,

link?

[abbeytim]

come and seee him talk about it on btc-e.com

[MacT]

 Wow. I happened to follow this from the start. I was showing a new-to-mining friend how things work by havingthem mine the brand new CoiledCoin. They only got 7 before Luke brute forced the plug to be pulled for "being a scamcoin".  Allchains.info has delisted Eligius and I suspect there will be other fallout as well. What a Krunky way for my friend to learn about mining 

[bitlane]

 Wow. I happened to follow this from the start. I was showing a new-to-mining friend how things work by havingthem mine the brand new CoiledCoin. They only got 7 before Luke brute forced the plug to be pulled for "being a scamcoin".  Allchains.info has delisted Eligius and I suspect there will be other fallout as well. What a Krunky way for my friend to learn about mining 

A great way to introduce new users to Cryptocurrencies and instil faith.

Good job Luke.....IDIOT.

[gmaxwell]

A great way to introduce new users to Cryptocurrencies and instil faith.

So we should instill false and unjustified faith in random cryptocoin ponzi schemes?    Since you won't provide the link as facts are an antidote for FUD: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56675.0

They only got 7 before Luke brute forced the plug to be pulled for "being a scamcoin".

So— You're mad that your 'friend' only got to mine seven blocks before someone with a lot more hash-power dominated the chain? Sounds kinda petty.

[bitlane]

A great way to introduce new users to Cryptocurrencies and instil faith.

So we should instill false and unjustified faith in random cryptocoin ponzi schemes?    Since you won't provide the link as facts are an antidote for FUD: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56675.0

They only got 7 before Luke brute forced the plug to be pulled for "being a scamcoin".

So— You're mad that your 'friend' only got to mine seven blocks before someone with a lot more hash-power dominated the chain? Sounds kinda petty.

Pointless.....another lukedashjr clone......
You guys must go to church together.

[koin]

They only got 7 before Luke brute forced the plug to be pulled for "being a scamcoin".

brute forcing and getting a longer chain doesn't "break" the currency does it?  sure, luke or whomever gets the generated coins that other miners originally assumed they got but the currency itself could keep on going after, right?

was it that bitcoin was only able to sneak through this phase because at the time there was no familiarity/fear of proof-of-work crypto currencies, no competitors to knock it down and no 100s of ghash/s excess capacity?

[makomk]

brute forcing and getting a longer chain doesn't "break" the currency does it?  sure, luke or whomever gets the generated coins that other miners originally assumed they got but the currency itself could keep on going after, right?

He's preventing anyone from getting blocks or performing transactions and has no incentive to stop, so it's kind of dead. He was also hinting in IRC that he might do the same to I0coin and Ixcoin and has more than enough hash power to do so, but it's possible he was joking.

was it that bitcoin was only able to sneak through this phase because at the time there was no familiarity/fear of proof-of-work crypto currencies, no competitors to knock it down and no 100s of ghash/s excess capacity?

No-one had the required financial incentive to attack it in this way.

[El Cabron]

link to some evidence he was involved in this??

[makomk]

link to some evidence he was involved in this??

Link. There are others, plus his messages in IRC though he's been pressuring people into not quoting those.

[El Cabron]

This has got to be a hoax. I highly doubt someone could be so much fail. It makes no sense at all, why just toss away all respect he ever had and his whole pool? I don't know but if he did do it I bet he was drunk or on drugs. No one would any compassion or apathy would be so abusive.

[DeathAndTaxes]

They only got 7 before Luke brute forced the plug to be pulled for "being a scamcoin".

brute forcing and getting a longer chain doesn't "break" the currency does it?  sure, luke or whomever gets the generated coins that other miners originally assumed they got but the currency itself could keep on going after, right?

was it that bitcoin was only able to sneak through this phase because at the time there was no familiarity/fear of proof-of-work crypto currencies, no competitors to knock it down and no 100s of ghash/s excess capacity?

Exactly.  Is there some rule that large miners can't merge mine alt-coins?

Bitcoin did have first mover advantage.  Hashing power grew organically and slowly and by the time large amounts of hashing power was available it was past that critical "early phase".

A large amount of hashing power didn't break the chain.  Miners and exchanges who stupidly believed a short lock period on a new chain was sufficient broke it.

On edit:  A useful countermeasure would be to replace the static locking time (120 blocks) for new coins w/ a variable one based on block chain length.  Maybe starting out with a lock of 1000 (not much use for alt-coins on day 0 anyways) declining wot 120 blocks based on block length over say the first year.

[bitlane]

Miners and exchanges who stupidly believed a short lock period on a new chain was sufficient broke it.

...and Pool Ops that abuse hashing power that doesn't belong to them to attack the competition, only to refuse transaction processing, orphaning everyone in the process.
Exactly....nothing wrong with that.

I honestly wish that I could reach through my screen and poke everyone in the forehead and scream WAKE UP, that uses the 'Merged Mining' excuse to help Luke's cause. IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH MERGED MINING OTHER THAN MERGED MINING ITSELF BEING USED MALICIOUSLY.

In this case, Merged Mining was not a tool, BUT A WEAPON that served the purpose that the Pool Op intended to use it for.....AS HE EXCLAIMED WITH JOY ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION, yet posting logs here to prove it would only result in the removal of said logs due to protest by Luke himself.
Go figure....

[doublec]

brute forcing and getting a longer chain doesn't "break" the currency does it?  sure, luke or whomever gets the generated coins that other miners originally assumed they got but the currency itself could keep on going after, right?

it can "break" the currency if the miner has greater than 51% and refuses to accept other miners blocks and refuses to include any transactions. Because they have >51% they always have the longest chain. No one else gets blocks, no transactions are allowed, so the chain is effectively dead. It's a pretty nifty example of the power of >51% hash rate.

[markm]

But looking at the listed hash rates of the top ten pools, it seems a very easy 51% to fix?

Or are all the pool operators akin to the lukester?

-MarkM-

[DeathAndTaxes]

But looking at the listed hash rates of the top ten pools, it seems a very easy 51% to fix?

How?  51% "vulnerability" is inherent in blockchains.

One way to look at it is that the block chain needs consensus (any dispute in validity need to be resolved).
In an election we use 1 person = 1 vote.
In a stock vote we use 1 share = 1 vote.

However block chains are psuedo anonymous so we use 1 hash = 1 vote.  It works perfectly as long as the "bad guys" never have more hashes than all the good guys combined.  They will simply be outvoted.