Bitcoin Dev Sells 50% of his Bitcoin due to 51% threat.

[BitCoinDream]

I would like to extend a hefty "Fuck you" to Peter Todd.

This is a market failure plain and simple, not a Bitcoin failure.

Then why does Bitcoin allow such a market condition in the first place?

Because Bitcoin is a decentralized free market product. GHash.io was not here at the beginning. They come up to here with their credentials. Its the job of the competitors to fight with them. Bitcoin has nothing to do with that.

[whtchocla7e]

I would like to extend a hefty "Fuck you" to Peter Todd.

This is a market failure plain and simple, not a Bitcoin failure.

Then why does Bitcoin allow such a market condition in the first place?

Because Bitcoin is a decentralized free market product. GHash.io was not here at the beginning. They come up to here with their credentials. Its the job of the competitors to fight with them. Bitcoin has nothing to do with that.

Except for allowing GHash to do what it's doing right now.

Agree on the rest though.

[jonald_fyookball]

miners are morons for joining a pool that already has +40% or not switching pools.

you cant fix stupid.

[SirChiko]

I wonder what will make him sell another 50% next time.

I told him to put at least half of his fiat into NXT, since NXT cannot be practically 51%-attacked. He hasn't replied yet, probably thinking about it.

Probably ignoring you and counting it as spam.

[devphp]

I wonder what will make him sell another 50% next time.

I told him to put at least half of his fiat into NXT, since NXT cannot be practically 51%-attacked. He hasn't replied yet, probably thinking about it.

Probably ignoring you and counting it as spam.

That's fine. He will join when he's ready, like many others. There is no hurry and no competition for NXT anywhere on the horizon.

[bitcoiner49er]

So get off Ghash people.

Here's a 4 day tabulation from [urlhttps://blockchain.info/pools?timespan=4days]Blockchain[/url].


Relayed By    Count Percent
GHash.IO    265  44%
Discus Fish    67   11%
BTC Guild    58  10%
Eligius    46   8%
Slush    21   4%

Discus Fish is 3 blocks ahead (67 x 4 = 268)
BTC Guild is 11 blocks behind (58 x 4.4 = 255.2)
Eligius is 13 blocks behind (58 x 5.5 = 253)
Slush is 34 blocks behind (21 x 11 = 231)

Aside from Slush, the other top 3 pools are basically "even" or ahead with Ghash in terms of mining revenue vs hashrate. Again, this in ONLY 4 days of data. I would speculate that a 30 day window would show even closer results.

[reg]

miners are morons for joining a pool that already has +40% or not switching pools.

you cant fix stupid.

miners are not morons-they are maximising profits in their own interests. Also I think most are not altruistic so would stay with a pool even if there are competing pools (a bit like staying with your bank even if others are equally good/bad). In a previous comment btc was not the problem the market was. Basically correct but previous performance ( good handling of the update fork) is no assurance that another fork will be equally well handled and it makes a lot of people nervous-including me!.

[dserrano5]

Why doesn't someone institute a worldwide consensus voting system?  Bitcoin is perfect for such a thing

People who choose to go with ghash are already voting in a way. They choose to give them so much hashing power.

[Peter R]

Bitcoin is more likely to succeed if it's possible that it may fail.  

If it was clear that there were no risks, then earlier adopters would be less inclined to diversify their wealth by divesting.  If these people didn't divest (sell), then coins wouldn't diffuse as quickly into a wide and efficient wealth distribution.  

I don't know how old Peter Todd is, but his linked-in profile states the he received his bachelor's degree in 2011.  So I assume he is in his twenties and that five figures¹ was enough that he felt he should diversify (perhaps to sleep more soundly at night).    

So, once again, it seems like bitcoin is evolving as it should.  

¹I'm assuming he means CAD and not BTC.

[Este Nuno]

Bitcoin is more likely to succeed if it's possible that it may fail. 

If it was clear that there were no risks, then earlier adopters would be less inclined to diversify their wealth by divesting.  If these people didn't divest (sell), then coins wouldn't diffuse as quickly into a wide and efficient wealth distribution. 

I don't know how old Peter Todd is, but his linked-in profile states the he received his bachelor's degree in 2011.  So I assume he is in his twenties and that five figures¹ was enough that he felt he should diversify (perhaps to sleep more soundly at night).   

So, once again, it seems like bitcoin is evolving as it should.   

¹I'm assuming he means CAD and not BTC.

I'm not sure I understand your point about wealth disfusing. The market price reflects the perceived risk.  The amount of coins is irrelevant really since bitcoin is divisible down to the ten millionth. Maybe I'm not understanding you here.

[pening]

He has a very valid point that the incentives in place are not strong enough to prevent a 51% threat

And what are the incentives to prevent a 51% attack?  Essentially it is the value of all Bitcoins held by those with the >51%, as if any attack occurs due to 51% attack the confidence in Bitcoin evaporates and with it the Bitcoin value.  Who *inside* Bitcoin has any interest in an attack?  Its an external threat from any organisation that wishes to destablise, disrupt or destroy Bitcoin, but to do so is now a very expensive matter.

[beetcoin]

i'm thinking maybe i should sell some of my coins as well. the 51% issue seems to be bitcoin's biggest hurdle. nevermind government regulation or scammers, this is the real issue.

[jjc326]

You can't say it's a "market issue" and it's not Bitcoin's fault.  Bitcoin is totally based on free market principles so yeah there is a Bitcoin problem.  I do believe that if someone WANTED TO they could take down Bitcoin for a relatively smaller amount of money.  This is a problem that needs to be addressed somehow otherwise how could you have major widespread adoption when there is a risk of a terrorist or something taking down the whole system?

[QuestionAuthority]

Is he concerned about a design flaw within Bitcoin or a design flaw with the open source project system?

ACH/EFT has had numerous attacks against it and numerous design flaws. The responsible team discovers the problem and corrects it, no big deal. That's what needs to happen with the design flaws within Bitcoin. The problem isn't that Bitcoin has a basic design flaw it's that no one is fixing it.

[humanitee]

Is he concerned about a design flaw within Bitcoin or a design flaw with the open source project system?

ACH/EFT has had numerous attacks against it and numerous design flaws. The responsible team discovers the problem and corrects it, no big deal. That's what needs to happen with the design flaws within Bitcoin. The problem isn't that Bitcoin has a basic design flaw it's that no one is fixing it.

Solutions are already being talked about.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/282j4m/petamine_1150_ths_is_considering_joining_p2pool/

P2Pool with a subsidy provided by the greater community (I'd throw them a couple coins a year) would do wonders. It could very easily become the most profitable place to mine if the community made it so.

I'm anticipating this being the scenario in the not too distant future.

[dwma]

miners are morons for joining a pool that already has +40% or not switching pools.

you cant fix stupid.

miners are not morons-they are maximising profits in their own interests. Also I think most are not altruistic so would stay with a pool even if there are competing pools (a bit like staying with your bank even if others are equally good/bad). In a previous comment btc was not the problem the market was. Basically correct but previous performance ( good handling of the update fork) is no assurance that another fork will be equally well handled and it makes a lot of people nervous-including me!.

Actually they are morons.  The 1% they save in pool fees is probably lost (in fiat value) due to all the FUD created by the 50% threat of ghash.io.

[sorryforthat]

GHASH has already stated that they will work on implimenting new features that will allow people who buy hash to point to a pool of their choosing. They are working to eliminate the fear that people have.

[Este Nuno]

Is he concerned about a design flaw within Bitcoin or a design flaw with the open source project system?

ACH/EFT has had numerous attacks against it and numerous design flaws. The responsible team discovers the problem and corrects it, no big deal. That's what needs to happen with the design flaws within Bitcoin. The problem isn't that Bitcoin has a basic design flaw it's that no one is fixing it.

I don't think the dev team views this as a problem that should be solved by technology and instead one that should be solved by the community. I wonder how big of a mistake this will be.

Clearly Mr. Todd thinks it's a big enough mistake to justify unloading half his coins.

[humanitee]

GHASH has already stated that they will work on implimenting new features that will allow people who buy hash to point to a pool of their choosing. They are working to eliminate the fear that people have.

Very interesting. You got a link by chance?

[ljudotina]

I don't think the dev team views this as a problem that should be solved by technology and instead one that should be solved by the community.

First thing Bitcoin community learned me is : "never trust anyone"
Secont thing is that bitcoin, as peer to peer, open source, whatnot is created so we dont need to trust anyone (central auth etc.). So basicly, if they are not fixing it and "trust that community will solve it" than that's like backstabbing yourself in the back. First you say: "Hey guys, look, ill give you tool that will enable you to control your own wealth w/o any central auth" and than few sentances after they say: "yes but you have to trust..."
Sorry but that holds no credit with me.
Almost every problem Bitcoin has, should be solved by software (changing protocol) not by hardware, or god forbid community.