We're not going anywhere, until the 51% question is answered

[fr33d0miz3r]

No, it wouldn't.

I don't see why the centralized payment system "Bitcoin" (owned by GHash inc.) wouldn't be the same as Visa.

[Gingermod]

No, it wouldn't.

I don't see why the centralized payment system "Bitcoin" (owned by GHash inc.) wouldn't be the same as Visa.

Because that's not what an individual with 51% mining power could do. Educate yourself.

[fr33d0miz3r]

Because that's not what an individual with 51% mining power could do. Educate yourself.

Will Ghash.IO be able, for example, to block all transactions from Russian IPs because of US sanctions? Or because the owner of GHash is from Ukraine.
Simply not include those txs into blocks.

[Gingermod]

Because that's not what an individual with 51% mining power could do. Educate yourself.

Will Ghash.IO be able, for example, to block all transactions from Russian IPs because of US sanctions?
Simply not include thos txs into blocks.

No because within 10 minutes Ghash.IO would lose at least 5% hashing power due to panic ending the 'attack'

[Bitcopia]

(wouldn't do major damage to the system)

The system will become the same as visa/mastercard/paypal. Isn't that a major damage?

No, because it will not become the same as visa etc. IF this becomes a problem, it will resolve itself quickly. If one central authority owned enough HARDWARE to execute a 51% attack then it would be slightly more disturbing, as they could have solely malicious intent. Their is no profitable model for catastrophe in the current situation. In fact, there is no model for catastrophe in the current situation. Miners will move if a REAL problem arises, but it almost definitely won't.

[Bitcopia]

Educate yourselves via one of the most knowledgable and prominent voices in bitcoin, Andreas Antonopolous:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTPQKyAq-DM#t=2942

[fr33d0miz3r]

No because within 10 minutes Ghash.IO would lose at least 5% hashing power due to panic ending the 'attack'

The problem is that miners won't care about US sanctions against Russia, or about Ukrainian people hating Russians.
Miners even won't notice that some transactions are not being included into blocks.

There are a lot of threats in this kind of situation, whatever Andreas says.
And no one does anything real to prevent this centralization in the future.

The system should not rely on people's responsibility. The system should be designed to work even if everyone is too stupid to change anything on his computer.

[Gingermod]

No because within 10 minutes Ghash.IO would lose at least 5% hashing power due to panic ending the 'attack'

The problem is that miners won't care about US sanctions against Russia, or about Ukrainian people hating Russians.
Miners even won't notice that some transactions are not being included into blocks.

There are a lot of threats in this kind of situation, whatever Andreas says.
And no one does anything real to prevent this centralization in the future.

The system should not rely on people's responsibility. The system should be designed to work even if everyone is too stupid to change anything on his computer.

Pretty sure you're trolling us now. Have fun with that.

[Raystonn]

Just a quick note: This attack is possible with anything greater than 50%.  51% is not required.

[fr33d0miz3r]

GHash generated 7 of 12 blocks since 0:00 UTC today. It means 58%.

[Ron~Popeil]

Educate yourselves via one of the most knowledgable and prominent voices in bitcoin, Andreas Antonopolous:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTPQKyAq-DM#t=2942

THANK YOU. So tired of the fud about this.

[Raystonn]

GHash generated 7 of 12 blocks since 0:00 UTC today. It means 58%.

For those who believe news controls the markets, that's good enough news as any to attribute as the reason behind the recent price drop.

[Ibian]

Educate yourselves via one of the most knowledgable and prominent voices in bitcoin, Andreas Antonopolous:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTPQKyAq-DM#t=2942

THANK YOU. So tired of the fud about this.

Hadn't heard about coinjoin. Auto-mixing sounds like a great idea.

[knightcoin]

just cut the cables .. is it a deja vu scene ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcwCnxOrA0M

[Bitcopia]

GHash generated 7 of 12 blocks since 0:00 UTC today. It means 58%.

I guess they better start double spending then!! I mean, this would be the time. Right? Right.

[Bitcopia]

Educate yourselves via one of the most knowledgable and prominent voices in bitcoin, Andreas Antonopolous:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTPQKyAq-DM#t=2942

THANK YOU. So tired of the fud about this.

Me too. Glad you took the time to watch that section. The whole video is great from start to finish if you have a couple hours to set aside.

[Raystonn]

GHash generated 7 of 12 blocks since 0:00 UTC today. It means 58%.

I guess they better start double spending then!! I mean, this would be the time. Right? Right.

The attack is about having >50% of the hashrate, not necessarily the generated blocks.  Block generation is completely random.  It's very possible for 1 person to generate 100 blocks in a minute.  Very improbable, but completely possible.  It's the hashrate that's important.

[akujin]

How does the pools' hashrate get monitored? Is it based on the data that the pool provide? What if let's say pool1 have 40% hashing power then pool2 have 11% then they combined their hashing power for a brief period of time? Will it get monitored?

[Raystonn]

How does the pools' hashrate get monitored? Is it based on the data that the pool provide? What if let's say pool1 have 40% hashing power then pool2 have 11% then they combined their hashing power for a brief period of time? Will it get monitored?

To be honest, there is no way to really monitor this.  If a few pools get together and decide to try to double spend, it would happen.  It would have to be a self destructive act, so it would likely be a hacker that was controlling all of them simultaneously.  It wouldn't be a rational hacker, as it would be more profitable to steal the BTC from the pools than force a double spend attack.  It would have to be a hacker with the psychological makeup of the Joker.  Once this attack happened, the Bitcoin Foundation would quickly move to reverse it and implement countermeasures.

[Swordsoffreedom]

The fact that they hit 48% tells me the average miner doesn't much care about it.

Because it's a non-issue. And if it becomes an issue, they will obviously move, as their profits rely on the success of bitcoin.

Well I think this opinion might be partially correct that said I read a few threads on Gigahash abusing its power when it last had greater than 50% of the network by reversing bets.
That said the network should correct itself if it is abused again so a non-issue but with a caution involved in it.

That said there is more incentive to leave the system working as it is than to double spend on it and lose more than you would gain