Bitcoin Forum
December 08, 2016, 10:04:32 AM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 [3]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: How many bitcoins can be produced in a single day?  (Read 9746 times)
SgtSpike
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344



View Profile
June 26, 2012, 07:38:06 PM
 #41

If I was a malicious attacker with 51%, I'd prevent everyone's transactions from happening and ask for a significant ransom.  Once the ransom is paid, then I'd resume normal activity.  And maybe rinse and repeat a little while later.

That's the only way I can see that I'd be potentially profitable without being traceable.  I can't imagine a double-spend actually working.  I'd probably end up getting caught and going to jail.  It'd be hard to buy ANY physical good without leaving some sort of trail.  And asking for higher transaction fees might work, but it'd be the lower-profit option, I believe.

Now, if I was a reasonable person with 51%, I'd just mine the heck out of Bitcoins and have a nice pile of them to do whatever I want with.  Seriously, if you're money-motivated, and have 51%, THAT is the best option.  It won't reduce confidence in Bitcoin (and thus your Bitcoin net worth), and it would continue to be profitable long into the future (whereas a double-spend or ransom attack would only be profitable in the short term).

Basically, I would completely eliminate the possibility of a 51% attack happening.  I don't see why any reasonable person would do it.  It would make them less money than simply mining with that hashing power.
1481191472
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481191472

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481191472
Reply with quote  #2

1481191472
Report to moderator
1481191472
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481191472

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481191472
Reply with quote  #2

1481191472
Report to moderator
1481191472
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481191472

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481191472
Reply with quote  #2

1481191472
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481191472
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481191472

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481191472
Reply with quote  #2

1481191472
Report to moderator
1481191472
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481191472

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481191472
Reply with quote  #2

1481191472
Report to moderator
sadpandatech
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504



View Profile
June 26, 2012, 08:51:14 PM
 #42

If I was a malicious attacker with 51%, I'd prevent everyone's transactions from happening and ask for a significant ransom.  Once the ransom is paid, then I'd resume normal activity.  And maybe rinse and repeat a little while later.

That's the only way I can see that I'd be potentially profitable without being traceable.  I can't imagine a double-spend actually working.  I'd probably end up getting caught and going to jail.  It'd be hard to buy ANY physical good without leaving some sort of trail.  And asking for higher transaction fees might work, but it'd be the lower-profit option, I believe.

Now, if I was a reasonable person with 51%, I'd just mine the heck out of Bitcoins and have a nice pile of them to do whatever I want with.  Seriously, if you're money-motivated, and have 51%, THAT is the best option.  It won't reduce confidence in Bitcoin (and thus your Bitcoin net worth), and it would continue to be profitable long into the future (whereas a double-spend or ransom attack would only be profitable in the short term).

Basically, I would completely eliminate the possibility of a 51% attack happening.  I don't see why any reasonable person would do it.  It would make them less money than simply mining with that hashing power.

I see it pretty much the way you do. That does still leave us with an entity that is not motivated by money and simply wanted to destroy bitcoin.

If you're not excited by the idea of being an early adopter 'now', then you should come back in three or four years and either tell us "Told you it'd never work!" or join what should, by then, be a much more stable and easier-to-use system. - GA
It is being worked on by smart people. -DamienBlack
Cablez
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400


I owe my soul to the Bitcoin code...


View Profile
June 26, 2012, 09:36:50 PM
 #43

'Some men just want to see the world burn.'    Grin Sorry I couldn't resist

Tired of substandard power distribution in your ASIC setup???   Chris' Custom Cablez will get you sorted out right!  No job too hard so PM me for a quote
Check my products or ask a question here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=74397.0
SgtSpike
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344



View Profile
June 26, 2012, 09:41:11 PM
 #44

If I was a malicious attacker with 51%, I'd prevent everyone's transactions from happening and ask for a significant ransom.  Once the ransom is paid, then I'd resume normal activity.  And maybe rinse and repeat a little while later.

That's the only way I can see that I'd be potentially profitable without being traceable.  I can't imagine a double-spend actually working.  I'd probably end up getting caught and going to jail.  It'd be hard to buy ANY physical good without leaving some sort of trail.  And asking for higher transaction fees might work, but it'd be the lower-profit option, I believe.

Now, if I was a reasonable person with 51%, I'd just mine the heck out of Bitcoins and have a nice pile of them to do whatever I want with.  Seriously, if you're money-motivated, and have 51%, THAT is the best option.  It won't reduce confidence in Bitcoin (and thus your Bitcoin net worth), and it would continue to be profitable long into the future (whereas a double-spend or ransom attack would only be profitable in the short term).

Basically, I would completely eliminate the possibility of a 51% attack happening.  I don't see why any reasonable person would do it.  It would make them less money than simply mining with that hashing power.

I see it pretty much the way you do. That does still leave us with an entity that is not motivated by money and simply wanted to destroy bitcoin.
This is true.  I should have concluded my post with "I would completely eliminate the possibility of a 51% attack happening by any profit-motivated malicious attacker."
crazy_rabbit
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162


RUM AND CARROTS: A PIRATE LIFE FOR ME


View Profile
June 27, 2012, 06:08:35 AM
 #45

I'm trying to visualize what this all means.  Soon the 7200 bitcoins per day max will be halved to 3600.

So now we have 3600 bitcoins spread out among...what would people guess...200TH/s once ASIC hits?  2,000TH/s?

aye, it's really hard to speculate now and comes down to just how much miners are willing to spend to buy asics. The preorders currently put the new hash rate at maybe 45TH by reward halving(much citation needed still). And will be largely influenced by how well the release goes and whether that encourages more miners to buy equipment or not.
BFL won't get to 2000TH/s any time soon. If you think about it, using the current SC ASICs that would be 2000 MiniRigs or 50,000 singles. Given the little we know about BFL's production and assuming that the new singles/minirigs take as long to produce as the old ones, how long do you think it will take to get 50,000 singles out the door? Of course, the $70M that would bring in at current prices finance quite the expansion.

We know via Bit-Pay that they got at least a quarter million dollars yesterday alone.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bitpay-shatters-record-for-bitcoin-payment-processing-2012-06-26

That buys 8.3 minirigs or 8.3 Terahashes.
Do you think they'll be able to ship out 8.3TH/s worth of gear in one day?

It's a good question given their track record. That said, in the past they were new at this and selling to a skeptical client base. I assume if they are smart enough to build and ASIC they are smart enough to solve their supply chain bottlenecks.

more or less retired.
imsaguy
General failure and former
VIP
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 574

Don't send me a pm unless you gpg encrypt it.


View Profile WWW
June 27, 2012, 07:03:20 AM
 #46

It's a good question given their track record. That said, in the past they were new at this and selling to a skeptical client base. I assume if they are smart enough to build and ASIC they are smart enough to solve their supply chain bottlenecks.

Assuming killed the cat.. or something.

Coming Soon!™ © imsaguy 2011-2013, All rights reserved.

EIEIO:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=60117.0

Shades Minoco Collection Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=65989
Payment Address: http://btc.to/5r6
FreeMoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


Strength in numbers


View Profile WWW
June 27, 2012, 07:09:25 AM
 #47

Technically... the rest of them. But really just a few times the normal amount in a day will send difficulty skyrocketing and bring it back to the average amount quickly.

Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
Meni Rosenfeld
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890



View Profile WWW
June 27, 2012, 08:47:42 AM
 #48

I see it pretty much the way you do. That does still leave us with an entity that is not motivated by money and simply wanted to destroy bitcoin.
This is true.  I should have concluded my post with "I would completely eliminate the possibility of a 51% attack happening by any profit-motivated malicious attacker."
1. Take a short position on BTC.
2. Destroy Bitcoin with a 51% attack.
3. Profit.

1EofoZNBhWQ3kxfKnvWkhtMns4AivZArhr   |   Who am I?   |   bitcoin-otc WoT
Bitcoil - Exchange bitcoins for ILS (thread)   |   Israel Bitcoin community homepage (thread)
Analysis of Bitcoin Pooled Mining Reward Systems (thread, summary)  |   PureMining - Infinite-term, deterministic mining bond
sadpandatech
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504



View Profile
June 27, 2012, 02:01:31 PM
 #49

I see it pretty much the way you do. That does still leave us with an entity that is not motivated by money and simply wanted to destroy bitcoin.
This is true.  I should have concluded my post with "I would completely eliminate the possibility of a 51% attack happening by any profit-motivated malicious attacker."
1. Take a short position on BTC.
2. Destroy Bitcoin with a 51% attack.
3. Profit.
mhmm
Is there anything you don't think of? =)

If you're not excited by the idea of being an early adopter 'now', then you should come back in three or four years and either tell us "Told you it'd never work!" or join what should, by then, be a much more stable and easier-to-use system. - GA
It is being worked on by smart people. -DamienBlack
Pages: « 1 2 [3]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!