I am selling half of my Bitcoin holdings because of Ghash

[moriartybitcoin]

Unfortunately, I'm following in Peter Todd's footsteps.  I'm a huge believer in decentralized cryptocurrency, not 'semi-decentralized' cryptocurrency.  Bitcoin needs to be TRUSTLESS for it to function as a viable and reliable currency.

Ghash.io has succeeded in centralizing Bitcoin.  Whether a 51% attack ever occurs is completely irrelevant; the POTENTIAL for such an attack makes Bitcoin extremely unreliable at this point.

Bitcoin core developers and the community need to come together to fix the Bitcoin protocol so that is no longer vulnerable to hijack by large mining pools. Until that happens, I can't fully trust Bitcoin as a value store, and neither should you.

I'm converting half of my Bitcoin to gold temporarily, and investigating other altcoins which could one day replace Bitcoin.  Cryptocurrency needs to be invulnerable to 51% attacks, or the entire theme of decentralization becomes a mockery.

Dr. Michael Moriarty

[blatchcorn]

I respect your decision, but I would wait and see if this July rally turns out to be true...

[darkota]

It'd be funny when Morarity sells half his bitcoins....and then the price skyrockets to $2,000 per coin. Ouch.

But in all seriousness, I agree.

Alt coins are way better to buy than Bitcoin, I heard Shibecoin was nice.

[moriartybitcoin]

It's not a financial decision per-se, more of a matter of principle.

I agree though - after the US Marshal sale, Bitcoin should explode upward in July and throughout the summer. I wouldn't be surprised to see prices hit $2000 by August.  Mass adoption is already occuring (Expedia, etc)

But, imagine what would happen if Ghash (or some other rogue operator or hacker who managed to gain control of Ghash) actually carried out a 51% attack.  Remember what the MtGox crash did to the price?  How would a 51% attack affect Bitcoin?  It would be a total, absolute catastrophe and I think most people would lose faith in the currency at that point.  

So I'm keeping half my Bitcoin holdings and exploring other cryptocurrencies which I think will be more viable in the future, ie those which are impervious to attack by a large mining pool.  Of course, if the Ghash issue is eventually resolved, I would consider moving the remainder of funds back into BTC.

Only time will sell ... I urge Gavin Andresen and other core developers and the Bitcoin community as a whole to band together and solve the mining pool issue once and for all.

[blatchcorn]

It's not a financial decision per-se, more of a matter of principle.

I agree though - after the US Marshal sale, Bitcoin should explode upward in July and throughout the summer. I wouldn't be surprised to see prices hit $2000 by August.  Mass adoption is already occuring (Expedia, etc)

But, imagine what would happen if Ghash (or some other rogue operator or hacker who managed to gain control of Ghash) actually carried out a 51% attack.  Remember what the MtGox crash did to the price?  How would a 51% attack affect Bitcoin?  It would be a total, absolute catastrophe and I think most people would lose faith in the currency at that point.  

So I'm keeping half my Bitcoin holdings and exploring other cryptocurrencies which I think will be more viable in the future, ie those which are impervious to attack by a large mining pool.  Of course, if the Ghash issue is eventually resolved, I would consider moving the remainder of funds back into BTC.

Only time will sell ... I urge Gavin Andresen and other core developers and the Bitcoin community as a whole to band together and solve the mining pool issue once and for all.

You could say then:

[acs267]

My god! People, what happens will happen! GHash is at what, 31% right now? Is it really still a threat? If there's a 51% attack, it happens! That's not going to change anything. But please follow the majority, and see were that gets ya. No ones holding you back, and I don't get why you had to publicly state this. Just do it.

[juju]

The attacker could only extend the chain 2 extra blocks per day over our honest chain. I was reading it would take several days worth of abusive hashing to reverse historical transactions thousands of blocks deep ( at 2 blocks per day), I think the miners in the attacking pool would notice something was wrong when they no longer are finding blocks for mulitple days straight.

https://blockchain.info/pools?timespan=24hrs  - Ghash.io is below 35% currently

With that said, I still agree we need to do something so new miners can acquire coins. Mining is largely centralized and this proves it. I would sell coins because the price is spiking downward due to the mass coin auction of Silk Road Assets and newbie 51% attack fears.

http://www.coindesk.com/ghash-io-never-launch-51-attack/

[blatchcorn]

My god! People, what happens will happen! GHash is at what, 31% right now? Is it really still a threat? If there's a 51% attack, it happens! That's not going to change anything. But please follow the majority, and see were that gets ya. No ones holding you back, and I don't get why you had to publicly state this. Just do it.

Its about sending a message  

Given that 20% of the network is unknown 31% is still a threat.  Bitcoin should be completely trustless

[Velkro]

ur decision ur bitcoins
im holding mine

[darkota]

It's because Bitcoin is mined by ASIC's, which are controlled by large ASIC farms, which are controlled by a few individuals.

Bitcoin would be much better if it was still GPU/CPU only.

[BittBurger]

Aside from creating this thread, you'll be the only one who gets the message you're trying to send.  You'll be in your house, alone, in your room, pressing the button, and the New York Times wont know.  And the Bitcoin Core dev team won't know.  And nothing will change, except you'll be 50% less bitcoin rich. 

-B-

[greenlion]

Write code instead of crying and making demands of other people.

[bluemeanie1]

why do we keep seeing announcements that people are getting OUT, while big names are clearly going IN?

-bm

[acs267]

My god! People, what happens will happen! GHash is at what, 31% right now? Is it really still a threat? If there's a 51% attack, it happens! That's not going to change anything. But please follow the majority, and see were that gets ya. No ones holding you back, and I don't get why you had to publicly state this. Just do it.

Its about sending a message  

Given that 20% of the network is unknown 31% is still a threat.  Bitcoin should be completely trustless

And we've explored approx. 7% of the ocean's floor, but you don't see me hopping to Canada because I think that that unknown piece will kill me.

What if it turns out it's not a threat, and he's the next person saying, "Sold out when I should've just stayed in"? Not trying to hold him in, but I see talking and not doing.

[moriartybitcoin]

why do we keep seeing announcements that people are getting OUT, while big names are clearly going IN?

-bm

The big names (Expedia, Overstock, King's College, etc) are indeed *GETTING IN*

But do you think they're accumulating and holding their Bitcoins?  Or cashing them out to fiat?  

I can guarantee you - 100% - that expedia is not in the business of holding Bitcoins as investment. They're cashing them out.  It's a payment method for their customers, not an investment for them. That's a huge difference.

I'm not *GETTING OUT* of Bitcoin at all.  I'm not selling my businesses; in fact I'm launching new Bitcoin sites.  I'm just not willing to hold a huge amount of my net worth (I don't use banks at all) in Bitcoin when a 51% attack could seriously damage the currency; even the threat of a 51% attack is bad enough to undermine my confidence in it.  

And, again, it's not just a financial decision, but an ideological one as well.  I don't want to be fully invested in centralized decentralized currency!

[moriartybitcoin]

It's because Bitcoin is mined by ASIC's, which are controlled by large ASIC farms, which are controlled by a few individuals.

Bitcoin would be much better if it was still GPU/CPU only.

I agree

[winit]

Please sell all your BTC.

The paranoid faction who continue to despair over Ghash are the very reason BTC is being held back.

BTC needs strong hands not overly obsessive, I'll informed, paranoid, get rich quick, freedom fighters.

Don't you see  that you would be sending a much stronger supportive message by holding your BTC than throwing your toys out of the pram at every opportunity?

Nothing happened, Ghash are not the enemy, they have invested far more than you and have no incentive to destroy that investment.

[Dacm4n]

My god! People, what happens will happen! GHash is at what, 31% right now? Is it really still a threat? If there's a 51% attack, it happens! That's not going to change anything. But please follow the majority, and see were that gets ya. No ones holding you back, and I don't get why you had to publicly state this. Just do it.

It's about getting others to panic sell.

[S4VV4S]

How many coins are we talking about and at what price are you willing to part with them?

Funny nobody else asked that.
The guy want's to dump coins and you don't want it?

[bluemeanie1]

why do we keep seeing announcements that people are getting OUT, while big names are clearly going IN?

-bm

The big names (Expedia, Overstock, King's College, etc) are indeed *GETTING IN*

But do you think they're accumulating and holding their Bitcoins?  Or cashing them out to fiat?  

I can guarantee you - 100% - that expedia is not in the business of holding Bitcoins as investment. They're cashing them out.  It's a payment method for their customers, not an investment for them. That's a huge difference.

for those businesses to accept BTC the price must be stabilized.  If it is stabilized, it is a good investment- especially when it is low(as it is right now).

seems to me what is going on is a program to get small hands out, and big hands in so they can run it up(past $1000?).

pretty much all the indicators that actually matter are saying Bitcoin is about to boom, meanwhile all the cheap, disposable and transient indicators are saying the opposite.

-bm

[bluemeanie1]

My god! People, what happens will happen! GHash is at what, 31% right now? Is it really still a threat? If there's a 51% attack, it happens! That's not going to change anything. But please follow the majority, and see were that gets ya. No ones holding you back, and I don't get why you had to publicly state this. Just do it.

It's about getting others to panic sell.

absolutely.  there has been several attempts at this in the past few weeks.

-bm

[beetcoin]

i'm thinking it's impossible to make a completely decentralized cryptocurrency. the game changes, and if you don't have people who fix the issues to address those changes, then the crypto will just die out. hopefully there's a way to do it, and someone innovative will come along.. but at present i don't think it's possible.

[bluemeanie1]

i'm thinking it's impossible to make a completely decentralized cryptocurrency. the game changes, and if you don't have people who fix the issues to address those changes, then the crypto will just die out. hopefully there's a way to do it, and someone innovative will come along.. but at present i don't think it's possible.

so far, we have yet to perfect Monetary Theory itself.  There are many different schools of thought (primarily the Austrians and the Keynesian), thus why would we assume that we need to some kind of perfect theory of cryptocoins to have a usable one?  Fact is Bitcoin offers features no other technology does.  I think there are room for innovations, but there is nothing compelling out there at the moment.

-bm

[beetcoin]

i'm thinking it's impossible to make a completely decentralized cryptocurrency. the game changes, and if you don't have people who fix the issues to address those changes, then the crypto will just die out. hopefully there's a way to do it, and someone innovative will come along.. but at present i don't think it's possible.

so far, we have yet to perfect Monetary Theory itself.  There are many different schools of thought (primarily the Austrians and the Keynesian), thus why would we assume that we need to some kind of perfect theory of cryptocoins to have a usable one?  Fact is Bitcoin offers features no other technology does.  I think there are room for innovations, but there is nothing compelling out there at the moment.

-bm

well, because most people (at least here) love bitcoin mainly because it's supposedly decentralized. when you put power in the hands of the corrupt, then there will be.. corruption.

a lot of people complain about status quo economics.. at least most here.

[bluemeanie1]

i'm thinking it's impossible to make a completely decentralized cryptocurrency. the game changes, and if you don't have people who fix the issues to address those changes, then the crypto will just die out. hopefully there's a way to do it, and someone innovative will come along.. but at present i don't think it's possible.

so far, we have yet to perfect Monetary Theory itself.  There are many different schools of thought (primarily the Austrians and the Keynesian), thus why would we assume that we need to some kind of perfect theory of cryptocoins to have a usable one?  Fact is Bitcoin offers features no other technology does.  I think there are room for innovations, but there is nothing compelling out there at the moment.

-bm

well, because most people (at least here) love bitcoin mainly because it's supposedly decentralized. when you put power in the hands of the corrupt, then there will be.. corruption.

a lot of people complain about status quo economics.. at least most here.

what happened to the USD when it became centralized?  did it's value go up or down?

-bm

[beetcoin]

i'm thinking it's impossible to make a completely decentralized cryptocurrency. the game changes, and if you don't have people who fix the issues to address those changes, then the crypto will just die out. hopefully there's a way to do it, and someone innovative will come along.. but at present i don't think it's possible.

so far, we have yet to perfect Monetary Theory itself.  There are many different schools of thought (primarily the Austrians and the Keynesian), thus why would we assume that we need to some kind of perfect theory of cryptocoins to have a usable one?  Fact is Bitcoin offers features no other technology does.  I think there are room for innovations, but there is nothing compelling out there at the moment.

-bm

well, because most people (at least here) love bitcoin mainly because it's supposedly decentralized. when you put power in the hands of the corrupt, then there will be.. corruption.

a lot of people complain about status quo economics.. at least most here.

what happened to the USD when it became centralized?  did it's value go up or down?

-bm

U.S. currency has always been centralized.. at least from the date that they started using paper notes. so how do we know when the value has gone up or down? and if you even want to talk about when the federal reserve was instituted, then $1 at that time was worth a lot more than $1 today.

[bluemeanie1]

i'm thinking it's impossible to make a completely decentralized cryptocurrency. the game changes, and if you don't have people who fix the issues to address those changes, then the crypto will just die out. hopefully there's a way to do it, and someone innovative will come along.. but at present i don't think it's possible.

so far, we have yet to perfect Monetary Theory itself.  There are many different schools of thought (primarily the Austrians and the Keynesian), thus why would we assume that we need to some kind of perfect theory of cryptocoins to have a usable one?  Fact is Bitcoin offers features no other technology does.  I think there are room for innovations, but there is nothing compelling out there at the moment.

-bm

well, because most people (at least here) love bitcoin mainly because it's supposedly decentralized. when you put power in the hands of the corrupt, then there will be.. corruption.

a lot of people complain about status quo economics.. at least most here.

what happened to the USD when it became centralized?  did it's value go up or down?

-bm

U.S. currency has always been centralized.. at least from the date that they started using paper notes. so how do we know when the value has gone up or down? and if you even want to talk about when the federal reserve was instituted, then $1 at that time was worth a lot more than $1 today.

good point, but inflation aside- centralization means better security.

-bm

[S4VV4S]

i'm thinking it's impossible to make a completely decentralized cryptocurrency. the game changes, and if you don't have people who fix the issues to address those changes, then the crypto will just die out. hopefully there's a way to do it, and someone innovative will come along.. but at present i don't think it's possible.

so far, we have yet to perfect Monetary Theory itself.  There are many different schools of thought (primarily the Austrians and the Keynesian), thus why would we assume that we need to some kind of perfect theory of cryptocoins to have a usable one?  Fact is Bitcoin offers features no other technology does.  I think there are room for innovations, but there is nothing compelling out there at the moment.

-bm

well, because most people (at least here) love bitcoin mainly because it's supposedly decentralized. when you put power in the hands of the corrupt, then there will be.. corruption.

a lot of people complain about status quo economics.. at least most here.

what happened to the USD when it became centralized?  did it's value go up or down?

-bm

U.S. currency has always been centralized.. at least from the date that they started using paper notes. so how do we know when the value has gone up or down? and if you even want to talk about when the federal reserve was instituted, then $1 at that time was worth a lot more than $1 today.

good point, but inflation aside- centralization means better security.

-bm

No it doesn't.
Take a look at the banking sector for example.
Constant improvement of the protocol does mean better security.

[beetcoin]

i'm thinking it's impossible to make a completely decentralized cryptocurrency. the game changes, and if you don't have people who fix the issues to address those changes, then the crypto will just die out. hopefully there's a way to do it, and someone innovative will come along.. but at present i don't think it's possible.

so far, we have yet to perfect Monetary Theory itself.  There are many different schools of thought (primarily the Austrians and the Keynesian), thus why would we assume that we need to some kind of perfect theory of cryptocoins to have a usable one?  Fact is Bitcoin offers features no other technology does.  I think there are room for innovations, but there is nothing compelling out there at the moment.

-bm

well, because most people (at least here) love bitcoin mainly because it's supposedly decentralized. when you put power in the hands of the corrupt, then there will be.. corruption.

a lot of people complain about status quo economics.. at least most here.

what happened to the USD when it became centralized?  did it's value go up or down?

-bm

U.S. currency has always been centralized.. at least from the date that they started using paper notes. so how do we know when the value has gone up or down? and if you even want to talk about when the federal reserve was instituted, then $1 at that time was worth a lot more than $1 today.

good point, but inflation aside- centralization means better security.

-bm

better security? yeah, probably for those who are controlling it. meanwhile, the others who are not involved in the decision making are the ones beholden to it.

[QuestionAuthority]

I agree with your point OP except you shouldn't just sell them into fiat. Why don't you hedge your bet by making a major purchase with half of your Bitcoin. That way you can make the statement you want, eliminate some of the risk of holding too much of a high risk investment and help the community at the same time. What Bitcoin needs badly is greater velocity of circulation. You would be doing a great favor for the community.

[ShakyhandsBTCer]

The issue with you sending a message is that ghash can not really control how much mining power they have at their pool short of disconnecting miners that are already working on it's pool.

[SpontaneousDream]

Panic selling 50% of your BTC holdings is stupid. There ARE going to be bumps in the road before bitcoin goes mainstream. Considering the amount of community outpour over this issue, I have confidence that the bigger players such as Gavin, Andreas, etc. (and the community) will find a way to resolve this.

I'm not worried.

[bluemeanie1]

Panic selling 50% of your BTC holdings is stupid. There ARE going to be bumps in the road before bitcoin goes mainstream. Considering the amount of community outpour over this issue, I have confidence that the bigger players such as Gavin, Andreas, etc. (and the community) will find a way to resolve this.

I'm not worried.

and we've never seen more evidence that it is going mainstream in all it's history!

-bm

[phillipsjk]

Bitcoin core developers and the community need to come together to fix the Bitcoin protocol so that is no longer vulnerable to hijack by large mining pools. Until that happens, I can't fully trust Bitcoin as a value store, and neither should you.

Unfortunately, you can't work around the 51% attack.

Bitcoin's innovation was to guard against malicious updates to the block-chain by requiring a "proof-of-work". This allows the validity of the block-chain to be verified in a trustless manner. The "proof-of-work" assumes two things:

• That people are generally good. (Bitcoin also makes is so that cheating in-system is more expensive than being honest.)
• That competition will ensure that no miner gets a substantial market-share. (If your business relies on bitcoin, it makes sense to invest in a full node or pay somebody to do so).

Pools having greater than 30% of the hash-power breaks the second assumption. 30% is the magic number because one of the pools may be run or coerced by a malicious person: we would not know until it is too late.

"Proof-of-work" is not something to be worked around. When you participate in the BItcoin network, you have to accept that it is a valid way to form consensus. There are no known alternatives that are still decentralized. Evidently, it is not known if "proof-of-work" can stay decentralized. However, if decentralization is not possible with "proof-of-work": that means that the experiment failed, and that Bitcoins are worth approximately $0.

This has happened before. What happened was hashers left Deepbit for other pools. This time it is different: many of the hashers seem to believe it is up to the developers to code a protocol change to solve the problem. They fail to see how they are contributing to the problem.

I see only only one solution: hashers need to start avoiding pools with more than 30% market share. Pools with more than 30% market share need to start raising fees. If these solutions don't start to materialize within about a week, I will join you in selling half my holdings.

Edit: There will probably arguments that I am asking hashers to go against their own self-interest. The purpose of hashing is to secure the network. If you refuse to monitor the health of the network, it is completely reasonable to expect more variance in price.

[galbros]

There is no doubt that the rise of Ghash.io to over 50% of the network fundamentally moves bitcoin away from a decentralized crypto currency.  While I still don't understand what made Ghash.io so irresistible to miners, it is clear that something I would never have expected to occur, has.

I think there needs to be a serious response to this other than denial and jawboning down of the threat (even though I agree it is not armageddon) and if there isn't, you may be very glad you did sell off half your coins.

Good Luck!

[beetcoin]

^ the good news is that a lot of people are concerned, and there will probably be some sort of effort to correct this issue. i don't know if cex.io is really genuine (and that things will work out well), but at least there is a discussion on it at /r/bitcoin

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/28aldt/ghashio_is_open_for_discussion/

[acs267]

Panic selling 50% of your BTC holdings is stupid. There ARE going to be bumps in the road before bitcoin goes mainstream. Considering the amount of community outpour over this issue, I have confidence that the bigger players such as Gavin, Andreas, etc. (and the community) will find a way to resolve this.

I'm not worried.

and we've never seen more evidence that it is going mainstream in all it's history!

-bm

Nope. I'm going to panic sell all of my Bitcoins, when we recently met the 100K merchant milestone, and when companies like Expedia, Holiday Inn, etc have started to accept it more. That's the smart thing to do, isn't it?

[bluemeanie1]

Panic selling 50% of your BTC holdings is stupid. There ARE going to be bumps in the road before bitcoin goes mainstream. Considering the amount of community outpour over this issue, I have confidence that the bigger players such as Gavin, Andreas, etc. (and the community) will find a way to resolve this.

I'm not worried.

and we've never seen more evidence that it is going mainstream in all it's history!

-bm

Nope. I'm going to panic sell all of my Bitcoins, when we recently met the 100K merchant milestone, and when companies like Expedia, Holiday Inn, etc have started to accept it more. That's the smart thing to do, isn't it?

also right before a major auction that has something like a 200k deposit requirement.

-bm

[toknormal]

Unfortunately, I'm following in Peter Todd's footsteps.  I'm a huge believer in decentralized cryptocurrency, not 'semi-decentralized' cryptocurrency.  Bitcoin needs to be TRUSTLESS for it to function as a viable and reliable currency.

Ghash.io has succeeded in centralizing Bitcoin.  Whether a 51% attack ever occurs is completely irrelevant; the POTENTIAL for such an attack makes Bitcoin extremely unreliable at this point.

Bitcoin core developers and the community need to come together to fix the Bitcoin protocol so that is no longer vulnerable to hijack by large mining pools. Until that happens, I can't fully trust Bitcoin as a value store, and neither should you.

You're not a "believer in decentralized crypto currency". If you were you'd understand the merits of the current philosophy. What you are asking for is more centralisation, not less.

Take a look at what's happening right now. GHash is approaching 51%. Who is that most a problem for  - THEM. Because if they get past 51% the entire Bitcoin economy will devalue and their business model will go down the pan. Being one of the biggest Bitcoin businesses, they also stand to be one of the biggest losers, so they HAVE to do something about it to save their business.

One the other hand, lets examine what will happen if we implement this suicidal solution that you propose in your post: GHash will then be able to safely continue to grow their monopoly towards 75% or even 90%.

The prospect of 90% mining pool monopolies will be far worse than a 50% one where the worst they can do is double spend the next block - and even at that not for very long because of the economic pressure to mitigate their mining monopoly.

In fact, what will happen if we simply allow this scenario to play itself out is that this period will be seen to be the age of "peak mining pool power" because from now on they'll understand that the sector has a glass ceiling to growth. They'll be less financial incentive for mining pools to grow and they'll naturally start to de-centralise.

Do NOT solve GHash's problem for them. DO NOT make it possible for them to gain a 90% monopoly by "fixing" Bitcoin. The system is good - let it do it's work.

[Jason]

I understand GHash is presently mining at 29% -- considerably down from the 51% they were mining at earlier.  Did this large decline in mining rate come about as a result of them voluntarily cutting back on their mining operations (or redirecting them elsewhere)?  Or, as I understand, were they a direct result of some actors within the community taking directed actions against GHash?  If the latter, then it seems that there is already an emergent mechanism in place for protecting the market against rogue operators.  I would be tempted to hold long enough to ascertain whether or not this mechanism can be relied upon in the future to take the necessary action should this happen again.  Presumably the threshold for going into action will be lower the next time (40% is already excessive).

[QuestionAuthority]

I understand GHash is presently mining at 29% -- considerably down from the 51% they were mining at earlier.  Did this large decline in mining rate come about as a result of them voluntarily cutting back on their mining operations (or redirecting them elsewhere)?  Or, as I understand, were they a direct result of some actors within the community taking directed actions against GHash?  If the latter, then it seems that there is already an emergent mechanism in place for protecting the market against rogue operators.  I would be tempted to hold long enough to ascertain whether or not this mechanism can be relied upon in the future to take the necessary action should this happen again.  Presumably the threshold for going into action will be lower the next time (40% is already excessive).

What's the total of unknown + Ghash? I think you might find that they are currently way over 51%. I do appreciate them making the pie chart look all pretty again though.

[Kprawn]

Well I think the solution will be to get big investors. {Oil companies} to fund the smaller unknown mining operations, to counter Ghash.

Or more people, caring about this, to invest in the smaller unknown miners.

I doubt, when Satoshi envisioned this currency in the beginning, that he wanted only big companies doing all the mining.

Your best bet would be to invest in smaller operations, to cancel the 51% attack. NOT to sell all your coins in fear of it.

Most people on this forum, agree that mining for bitcoins with GPU's are gone, but mining with ASIC is still possible. So subsidize smaller "unknowns" with investment capital for them to be competitive, instead of buying hash with ROI periods of 10 months or more.

According to Andreas M. Antonopoulos there are many ways to counter 51% attacks, they have just not implemented it yet or needed to.

[QuestionAuthority]

Well I think the solution will be to get big investors. {Oil companies} to fund the smaller unknown mining operations, to counter Ghash.

Or more people, caring about this, to invest in the smaller unknown miners.

I doubt, when Satoshi envisioned this currency in the beginning, that he wanted only big companies doing all the mining.

Your best bet would be to invest in smaller operations, to cancel the 51% attack. NOT to sell all your coins in fear of it.

Most people on this forum, agree that mining for bitcoins with GPU's are gone, but mining with ASIC is still possible. So subsidize smaller "unknowns" with investment capital for them to be competitive, instead of buying hash with ROI periods of 10 months or more.

According to Andreas M. Antonopoulos there are many ways to counter 51% attacks, they have just not implemented it yet or needed to.

The bible (white paper) tells a story of pure greed. Their is no reason to a fear a node with controlling interest in the system because their rational self interest, being the same as ours, is for more wealth.

The incentive may help encourage nodes to stay honest. If a greedy attacker is able to assemble more CPU power than all the honest nodes, he would have to choose between using it to defraud people by stealing back his payments, or using it to generate new coins. He ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules, such rules that favour him with more new coins than everyone else combined, than to undermine the system and the validity of his own wealth.

I suppose being a scientist his failure to take political, social or psychological perspectives into account is understandable. Greed is the only reason to not take action against Bitcoin when you are in control. Governments pour trillions of dollars into self preservation annually. Crazy people kill just because they can do it. Radicals, believing their way is the only way, forgo personal wealth and chain themselves to trees to stop what they believe is the ultimate evil. There are major holes in the original structure of Bitcoin. Nakamoto did a good job with the organization of the concept by building on a foundation laid by the leading minds of the time but the practical application is unworkable without modification.

[LiteCoinGuy]

I'm converting half of my Bitcoin to gold temporarily, and investigating other altcoins which could one day replace Bitcoin.  Cryptocurrency needs to be invulnerable to 51% attacks, or the entire theme of decentralization becomes a mockery.

Dr. Michael Moriarty

yeah, like Litecoin, good job Dr.   

[bEGPO cNuPTA]

I agree with your point OP except you shouldn't just sell them into fiat. Why don't you hedge your bet by making a major purchase with half of your Bitcoin. That way you can make the statement you want, eliminate some of the risk of holding too much of a high risk investment and help the community at the same time. What Bitcoin needs badly is greater velocity of circulation. You would be doing a great favor for the community.

Didn't he say he was going BTC -> gold and holding gold as a stopgap measure? Or did I misunderstand.

And what type of purchase do you have in mind?

[QuestionAuthority]

I agree with your point OP except you shouldn't just sell them into fiat. Why don't you hedge your bet by making a major purchase with half of your Bitcoin. That way you can make the statement you want, eliminate some of the risk of holding too much of a high risk investment and help the community at the same time. What Bitcoin needs badly is greater velocity of circulation. You would be doing a great favor for the community.

Didn't he say he was going BTC -> gold and holding gold as a stopgap measure? Or did I misunderstand.

And what type of purchase do you have in mind?

I would try to live on it if I could. I know I'm getting rid of half so why not pay for everything in your life with it and benefit Bitcoin in the process. If you were right you only lost half of your Bitcoins. If you were wrong it wouldn't matter because you helped the economy grow. Almost a win-win.

[S4VV4S]

Is it me or is the Dr. gone ever since I asked how many coins and at what price will he be willing to part with them?

[QuestionAuthority]

Is it me or is the Dr. gone ever since I asked how many coins and at what price will he be willing to part with them?

Page after page of people making fun of him and he abandons the thread. Funny that?

[Beliathon]

Unfortunately, I'm following in Peter Todd's footsteps.

Unfortunately for you. Fortunately for all the smart(er) people who will buy up those coins at ~$600 and sell at $1,000, $6,000, or $60,000 per BTC. Don't say I didn't warn you.

[Argwai96]

Personally, I prefer to time the market for my exit, if I'm going to drop 50% of my holdings. We're primed for another push to $700s-$800s. Then I'd unload.

[bEGPO cNuPTA]

I agree with your point OP except you shouldn't just sell them into fiat. Why don't you hedge your bet by making a major purchase with half of your Bitcoin. That way you can make the statement you want, eliminate some of the risk of holding too much of a high risk investment and help the community at the same time. What Bitcoin needs badly is greater velocity of circulation. You would be doing a great favor for the community.

Didn't he say he was going BTC -> gold and holding gold as a stopgap measure? Or did I misunderstand.

And what type of purchase do you have in mind?

I would try to live on it if I could. I know I'm getting rid of half so why not pay for everything in your life with it and benefit Bitcoin in the process. If you were right you only lost half of your Bitcoins. If you were wrong it wouldn't matter because you helped the economy grow. Almost a win-win.

That's a pretty good idea. Buy everything you need off Amazon via gift cards ect. Book any travel on Expedia. Things like that are good and help support the companies that have stepped up to accept btc.

[QuestionAuthority]

I agree with your point OP except you shouldn't just sell them into fiat. Why don't you hedge your bet by making a major purchase with half of your Bitcoin. That way you can make the statement you want, eliminate some of the risk of holding too much of a high risk investment and help the community at the same time. What Bitcoin needs badly is greater velocity of circulation. You would be doing a great favor for the community.

Didn't he say he was going BTC -> gold and holding gold as a stopgap measure? Or did I misunderstand.

And what type of purchase do you have in mind?

I would try to live on it if I could. I know I'm getting rid of half so why not pay for everything in your life with it and benefit Bitcoin in the process. If you were right you only lost half of your Bitcoins. If you were wrong it wouldn't matter because you helped the economy grow. Almost a win-win.

That's a pretty good idea. Buy everything you need off Amazon via gift cards ect. Book any travel on Expedia. Things like that are good and help support the companies that have stepped up to accept btc.

Exactly! Make the companies that support Bitcoin proud of their decision, help Bitcoin, hedge your investment, stand up for your principles, bla, bla, bla.

[redhawk979]

Gavin has said he has some code sitting aside for this when it becomes a critical issue, so to brush it off is stupid otherwise he wouldn't care at all.

[ThomasCrowne]

ive actually been giving this some thought as well.  even though i'm only sitting on a couple of coins personally all this talk of ghash.io 51% attack (intentional or not) has me a bit worried

[fryarminer]

I'm converting half of my Bitcoin to gold temporarily, and investigating other altcoins which could one day replace Bitcoin.  Cryptocurrency needs to be invulnerable to 51% attacks, or the entire theme of decentralization becomes a mockery.

Dr. Michael Moriarty

yeah, like Litecoin, good job Dr.   

Stupid question: Is Litecoin vulnerable to a 51% attack? Sorry stupid question but I haven't studied much on Litecoin.

If it's not, this would be its opportunity to really take off. Now that BTC price is going up, it seems that Ghash is also getting more hash rate - it wouldn't surprise me if they are purposely doing this to control the btc price.

[moriartybitcoin]

Yes, Litecoin is vulnerable too - the Coinotron Pool represents a major 51% threat on Litecoin.

NXT is an interesting crypto because it is NOT vulnerable to 51% attack since mining occurs within the user's wallets.

Most major cryptos are mined by ASIC hardware which ends up resulting in mining pool monopolies like Ghash, Coinotron, etc. 

In my opinion, Bitcoin needs to undergo some major changes at the protocol level to mitigate the threat posted by 51%.  This is not the first or last time we'll be facing such a potential calamity.  If Bitcoin can't overcome this threat, I think we need to investigate mass exodus from Bitcoin into some other more stable and truly decentralized crypto - like NXT. 

Disclaimer: I am not particularly knowledgeable about NXT and I don't advocate it right now.  I simply like the idea that it can't be attacked by 51%.

[moriartybitcoin]

Personally, I prefer to time the market for my exit, if I'm going to drop 50% of my holdings. We're primed for another push to $700s-$800s. Then I'd unload.

I think Bitcoin is heading to $1000+ after the US Marshall sale.

Problem is, it's hard to estimate the 'real' price of Bitcoin, and it's hard to figure out when massive speculation is driving up the price beyond realistic levels.  As we learned from the Gox fiasco, it is also very difficult to determine when price spikes are due to intentional manipulation by trading bots on large exchanges.  Like MtGox, BitStamp AND BTC-E both have the power to manipulate the Bitcoin price due to shady trading activities ...

[devphp]

If you're fascinated with Proof-of-Work and are afraid of 51% attack, Myriadcoin is the coin for you.
If you're ok with Proof-of-Stake, nothing better than NXT right now.

[darkota]

The OP didnt sell shit.

Obvious way to try and make the bitcoin price drop down so he could buy in lower.

If he did "sell", I'm sure he had like .005 bitcoin anyway, so .00025 bitcoin sold. wow big deal.

[beetcoin]

The OP didnt sell shit.

Obvious way to try and make the bitcoin price drop down so he could buy in lower.

If he did "sell", I'm sure he had like .005 bitcoin anyway, so .00025 bitcoin sold. wow big deal.

good job jumping to a conclusion. how do you know he didn't sell the coins? you could be right, but you could also be wrong. no need for armchair detective work.. if you aren't actually doing any detective work.

[darkota]

The OP didnt sell shit.

Obvious way to try and make the bitcoin price drop down so he could buy in lower.

If he did "sell", I'm sure he had like .005 bitcoin anyway, so .00025 bitcoin sold. wow big deal.

good job jumping to a conclusion. how do you know he didn't sell the coins? you could be right, but you could also be wrong. no need for armchair detective work.. if you aren't actually doing any detective work.

This is all just a play by the OP, anyone who was serious wouldnt find the need to make a thread about it, look at the title: "I am selling half of my Bitcoin holdings because of Ghash", If he actually sold the coins, he would of changed the title also, and his original post.

I conclude he hasn't sold the coins, and if he has, it is a very very insignificant amount...

[phillipsjk]

As promised in this post (1 day late), I have sold half of my Bitcoin.

This month I sold a total of 750mBTC. The first 250mBTC was unrelated to the mining concentration situation, but I am counting it because I have another 250mBTC that I can not access. For the remaining 500mBTC, I broke up my Bitcoin with a vanity 1Bitcoin address. That address has some sentimental value. I would sign a message with the private key, but multibit does not appear to let me import raw private keys. The sx tools I use do not appear to support arbitrary message signing.

PS: I caution any would-be followers that the sx tools are scray and typos can lead to unexpectedly large mining fees. While I do use vanity addresses, I never re-use them (mining being a possible exception). I actually cross out each address on the paper copy of my key-pairs (wallet if you will) as I use them.

[jabo38]

There you go.  Looks like he sold them.

I agree that the 51% is a huge issue.  Shame on Ghash!

Still.... If I cash out bitcoins, what should I buy. 

Litecoin is going down day by day, even month by month.
NXT is going down and finding its new price after a big run.
Peercoin has consistently gone down for quite some time.
Darkcoin had a huge run and is going down and down. 
Ripple hasn't gone up since I am not sure when.
And poor Doge hasn't done anything but go down and because of mining will just continue.

When a real alternative comes along, I will go into it big.  Right now most of my non-bitcoin money is in NXT because I see them coming out with lots of new features of the months and coming year.  But Peercoin, Darkcoin, Ripple, Litecoin, and Doge won't ever add a single other feature and so their prices will go down. 

Well.... Litecoin is getting Asics, and while that doesn't give the coin itself a feature, it does change the network.  I have heard arguments on both sides why this is good and/or bad though.  If anything, it will make the price go cheaper as Asics will be sweeping up most of the coins on the easy so they can afford to sell on the cheap.

[ChuckOne]

And, again, it's not just a financial decision, but an ideological one as well.  I don't want to be fully invested in centralized decentralized currency!

+1

[ChuckOne]

why do we keep seeing announcements that people are getting OUT, while big names are clearly going IN?

-bm

Because big names like centralization. They trust trust. They are used to trust. So, they have no problem with a centralized currency.

They actually want the only benefit of Cryptocurrency = cheap transfer of money from A to B

[zimmah]

It's because Bitcoin is mined by ASIC's, which are controlled by large ASIC farms, which are controlled by a few individuals.

Bitcoin would be much better if it was still GPU/CPU only.

the problem is not the asic farms, the problem is the asic companies who don't deliver to customers like they promise. Customers have been burned by asic manufacturers so often that almost no one dares ordering there anymore.

Makes me wonder if some/most big mining farms are connected to the manufacturers in some way.

Anyway the panic was for nothing (as usual, bitcoin society likes to panic over nothing), Ghash is back to 33% or so.

[Gyrsur]

what I have learned so far about Bitcoin: a system where no trust is necessary because there are algorithm (math).

so then be so consequent and remove trust out of the concept of Bitcoin.

at the moment trust in mining pools is necessary .

[S4VV4S]

Guys I have decided to sell half of my Bitcoins too because of GHash.

Anybody wanna buy 0.7BTC for $1000?

It's a good offer   

[rext]

Reminds me of the sentence, "Too big to fail"