So ... Can Goverment stop Bitcoin ?

[btcxyzzz]

They only need to seize ghash.io, or they could just point all universities data center to btc for a couple of hours...

1) plausible
2) BTC is much stronger than CPUs at all universities.

[NeuroticFish]

Why everybody states that a 51% attack is unpractical/costly for a government?

They only need to seize ghash.io, or they could just point all universities data center to btc for a couple of hours...

Not so costly or unpractical, a single fighter jet cost considerably more.

There are not many governments with such economic power. US and ... that's all. Now, in US there's "democracy", so they need to cover such big action with quite a big legislation and ghash.io will have more than enough time to move or split (if it's not already split) between more locations / countries.

And without the power of ghash.io, only with universities and such, I think the 51% cannot happen. CPU and GPU mining goes nowhere, remember?

[cbeast]

If USA decided to spend one trillion to attack Bitcoin, China could make them waste that trillion with far less. They could show how weak the USA is.

[erre]

I didn't remember where, but I read that all mining equipment currently running have the cost of roughly 500 mln dollars. That's not so much for a government, considering a single last-generation fighter jet cost 150 mln dollars.

Even BANKS have the economic power to destroy btc via 51% attack, they could do if it became convenient to act like that.

As far as I can understand, btc need a solution to 51% attack before any huge massive adoption, or it remain vulnerable by a very powerful enemy who wants to destroy btc.

Ghash.io could " destroy"  bitcoin tomorrow, if it's convenient for them. This is scary and I don't like it at all.

[cbeast]

Scared of your government? Good it's working.

[ruins]

of course gov can't stop it
it is up to the public, if public accept it , gov can do nothing about it.

[Q7]

Theoretically things can be made as difficult as hell but there is no such thing as total blackout. A person can even create an online account if they want to but there are so many ways a person can bypass the control and restrictions. Put it another way, it's not possible

[mullerdan]

They forbid torrents and look the results..people continue , I think bitcoin is the same, we can stop it, it will not happen..at least I hope !

[tanaka]

Of course they can..

[RodeoX]

Of course they can..

Care to elaborate as to how this can be done?

[erre]

Of course they can..

Care to elaborate as to how this can be done?

51% attack, as stated before. They can't do it with torrents, and it would be obviously a violent act... but the blockchain can be "destroyed "  via a series of 51% attacks

[RodeoX]

Of course they can..

Care to elaborate as to how this can be done?

51% attack, as stated before. They can't do it with torrents, and it would be obviously a violent act... but the blockchain can be "destroyed "  via a series of 51% attacks

To launch a malicious 51% attack will mean spending at least tens (hundreds?) of millions of dollars. This investment will not destroy bitcoin at all. It may hurt the price in the short term, but what is going to happen when we fork the chain? They will have to spend billions of dollars year after year suppressing the price to no end. It is not logical to do this.
Whoever is the architect of this evil plan will have to explain to congress, the GAB, and the American people why they spent billions. Why on Earth would this happen?

There is zero evidence of any kind that our government has any interest in doing this. And if they decided to, what would keep China from propping up the network so that they never reach 51%? They could watch us throw away dollars by spending pennies. There is no such thing as a profitable 51% attack.

[bitsmichel]

We'd have bitcoin 2.0,  betcoin, batcoin and a million of other coins. Many coins are around already now.
The government should not stop innovation. 

[erre]

Of course they can..

Care to elaborate as to how this can be done?

51% attack, as stated before. They can't do it with torrents, and it would be obviously a violent act... but the blockchain can be "destroyed "  via a series of 51% attacks

To launch a malicious 51% attack will mean spending at least tens (hundreds?) of millions of dollars. This investment will not destroy bitcoin at all. It may hurt the price in the short term, but what is going to happen when we fork the chain? They will have to spend billions of dollars year after year suppressing the price to no end. It is not logical to do this.
Whoever is the architect of this evil plan will have to explain to congress, the GAB, and the American people why they spent billions. Why on Earth would this happen?

There is zero evidence of any kind that our government has any interest in doing this. And if they decided to, what would keep China from propping up the network so that they never reach 51%? They could watch us throw away dollars by spending pennies. There is no such thing as a profitable 51% attack.

Governments have a different concept for " profitable" . Is profitable spend 10 billion dollars/year to bomb ISIS?

If bitcoin will in the future REALLY threaten the egemony of central banks, spamming some thousand fake blockchains via 51% attacks will be a cheap intervention compared to what cost to drop some bombs for hopefully gain some political influence in Iraq. They can do it for " free"  by seizing the ghash.io facilities, too.

You said bitcoiners can fork the chain, but who is a trusted user if nsa or something like that is involved? And they can attack the forked chain too...

And China... lol... do you really think that China want an unregulated decentralized world currency?

[RodeoX]

Governments have a different concept for " profitable" . Is profitable spend 10 billion dollars/year to bomb ISIS?

Yes I do. the future of the mid east has trillions of dollars at stake.

If bitcoin will in the future REALLY threaten the egemony of central banks, spamming some thousand fake blockchains via 51% attacks will be a cheap intervention compared to what cost to drop some bombs for hopefully gain some political influence in Iraq. They can do it for " free"  by seizing the ghash.io facilities, too.

Again, it will not do anything to stop people from using crypto. And under what legal authority can the government seize thousands of home computers in a pool mine? None. And who will do that? Are thousands of police officers going to fan out and bust into homes? Of course not.

You said bitcoiners can fork the chain, but who is a trusted user if nsa or something like that is involved? And they can attack the forked chain too...

I don't understand the NSA part, but yes they can spend billions attacking chain after chain. And we can create a new chain for no money at all.

And China... lol... do you really think that China want an unregulated decentralized world currency?

No. but they do want to dominate the world economy. What better way to grow than wasting the money of your competitors. 

[erre]

Governments have a different concept for " profitable" . Is profitable spend 10 billion dollars/year to bomb ISIS?

Yes I do. the future of the mid east has trillions of dollars at stake.

How much is worth the ability to do tricks with your money? I'm talking about a massive adoption of btc as world currency, a much worse scenario than ISIS for governments.

If bitcoin will in the future REALLY threaten the egemony of central banks, spamming some thousand fake blockchains via 51% attacks will be a cheap intervention compared to what cost to drop some bombs for hopefully gain some political influence in Iraq. They can do it for " free"  by seizing the ghash.io facilities, too.

Again, it will not do anything to stop people from using crypto. And under what legal authority can the government seize thousands of home computers in a pool mine? None. And who will do that? Are thousands of police officers going to fan out and bust into homes? Of course not.

Sorry, I meant cex.io. and facilities like that. But also hacking/take physically ghash should work.

You said bitcoiners can fork the chain, but who is a trusted user if nsa or something like that is involved? And they can attack the forked chain too...

I don't understand the NSA part, but yes they can spend billions attacking chain after chain. And we can create a new chain for no money at all.

Who are " we" ?
Are you as a legendary user more " we"  than me on the blockchain?
As far as I know, having some " more trusted"  blockchains (but with less hashes) and some " less trusted" (but with more hashes) will be equal to killing bitcoin concept. No more a decentralized currency, but only a token.

And China... lol... do you really think that China want an unregulated decentralized world currency?

No. but they do want to dominate the world economy. What better way to grow than wasting the money of your competitors.  

How can you dominate the world economy if you can 't  control the money?

[btcduke]

Unless all the governments of the world ban bitcoin together.