Pages:
Author

Topic: .. - page 3. (Read 2997 times)

sr. member
Activity: 254
Merit: 1258
July 23, 2014, 08:27:44 AM
#12
What scares me is the fact someone with a lot of money and evil intentions could buy a shit tone of ASICS and try to push a 51%+ attack in coordination. If sometimes this happens by (allegedly) accident randomly, imagine if when the pool is close to 51%+, a lot of ASICS are turned on out of nowhere in that same pool pushing the % a lot higher.
Well when we see the NSA headquaters buy tons of Asics we will start to be concerned, but until that happens i won't be too worried.
full member
Activity: 154
Merit: 100
Is there life on Mars?
July 23, 2014, 08:26:45 AM
#11
This threat seems very, very likely at some point. The cost of an attack wouldn't actually be that much to pull off. Even a short term (i.e. much cheaper) attack could completely destabilize the faith people have in Bitcoin.

Are we just waiting for an attack to occur before actually doing anything?

An attacker that isn't motivated by money will eventually attempt an attack. This isn't an "if", it's a "when".

Some billionaire, inherited wealth rich kid could completely devastate Bitcoin for under $50 Million.

Some people love to wreck shit. Rich guys that love to wreck shit? It could get ugly.

Somebody console me. I want to be wrong. What am I overlooking?


What can we do about it? That's the nature of Bitcoin, you can't do anything about it, unless the majority agrees on something. And how is the majority being determined? By hashing power, that's the limiting factor and the whole idea behind Bitcoin!

Majority is easy. When hard fork comes, ppl will use version 1 or version 2. Version that has more users wins. No problem about it.
Problem is what exactly CAN be done? When you start digging into the topic, you find out that ppl had ton of ideas, and that every single one of them fails even in theory. This topic is nothing that can be fixed by anything shorter than "revolutionary solution", and we can agree that that kind of solutions don't come from day to day.

Yeah, a fork can be done at any time people can't agree on a specific way to adhere to bitcoin's rules. If for example tainted coins become a topic or some state forces the protocol to incorporate certain things, a hard fork may occur. People will then have to decide which chain to follow. Of course, bitcoins value will suffer greatly. But that's how it works - by definition!
legendary
Activity: 3472
Merit: 4794
July 23, 2014, 08:25:40 AM
#10
Some billionaire, inherited wealth rich kid could completely devastate Bitcoin for under $50 Million.

Source?

How did you come up with that number?

Did you just pick $50 Million because it sounds like a big number that a "rich" person could accomplish and makes it sound scary?
legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1029
July 23, 2014, 08:24:10 AM
#9
This threat seems very, very likely at some point. The cost of an attack wouldn't actually be that much to pull off. Even a short term (i.e. much cheaper) attack could completely destabilize the faith people have in Bitcoin.

Are we just waiting for an attack to occur before actually doing anything?

An attacker that isn't motivated by money will eventually attempt an attack. This isn't an "if", it's a "when".

Some billionaire, inherited wealth rich kid could completely devastate Bitcoin for under $50 Million.

Some people love to wreck shit. Rich guys that love to wreck shit? It could get ugly.

Somebody console me. I want to be wrong. What am I overlooking?


What can we do about it? That's the nature of Bitcoin, you can't do anything about it, unless the majority agrees on something. And how is the majority being determined? By hashing power, that's the limiting factor and the whole idea behind Bitcoin!

Majority is easy. When hard fork comes, ppl will use version 1 or version 2. Version that has more users wins. No problem about it.
Problem is what exactly CAN be done? When you start digging into the topic, you find out that ppl had ton of ideas, and that every single one of them fails even in theory. This topic is nothing that can be fixed by anything shorter than "revolutionary solution", and we can agree that that kind of solutions don't come from day to day.
legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1029
July 23, 2014, 08:17:26 AM
#8
This threat seems very, very likely at some point. The cost of an attack wouldn't actually be that much to pull off. Even a short term (i.e. much cheaper) attack could completely destabilize the faith people have in Bitcoin.

Are we just waiting for an attack to occur before actually doing anything?

An attacker that isn't motivated by money will eventually attempt an attack. This isn't an "if", it's a "when".

Some billionaire, inherited wealth rich kid could completely devastate Bitcoin for under $50 Million.

Some people love to wreck shit. Rich guys that love to wreck shit? It could get ugly.

Somebody console me. I want to be wrong. What am I overlooking?


I had semi similar view about this topic as you untill i dug deep into BTC problematics. Thing is, it's not that noone is doing nothing, it's that noone can not do nothing. There are few ideas floating around that could not prevent but make it more costly to execute 51% attack, but they are very complicated and could have very negative impact on BTC. Dealing with 51% attack when PoW is in question is really really really hard. If it was any easyer, it would already be done.
If you really want to "console" yourself, i urge you to read some BTC documentation. It's not as easy to attack bitcoin eather....easy in like: oh look ill just spend this 50mil$ and BTC is gone. Nope...cant happen "just like that".
full member
Activity: 154
Merit: 100
Is there life on Mars?
July 23, 2014, 08:13:23 AM
#7
This threat seems very, very likely at some point. The cost of an attack wouldn't actually be that much to pull off. Even a short term (i.e. much cheaper) attack could completely destabilize the faith people have in Bitcoin.

Are we just waiting for an attack to occur before actually doing anything?

An attacker that isn't motivated by money will eventually attempt an attack. This isn't an "if", it's a "when".

Some billionaire, inherited wealth rich kid could completely devastate Bitcoin for under $50 Million.

Some people love to wreck shit. Rich guys that love to wreck shit? It could get ugly.

Somebody console me. I want to be wrong. What am I overlooking?


What can we do about it? That's the nature of Bitcoin, you can't do anything about it, unless the majority agrees on something. And how is the majority being determined? By hashing power, that's the limiting factor and the whole idea behind Bitcoin!
legendary
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1014
In Satoshi I Trust
July 23, 2014, 08:11:55 AM
#6
because its complicated?
sr. member
Activity: 322
Merit: 250
July 23, 2014, 08:11:12 AM
#5
What scares me is the fact someone with a lot of money and evil intentions could buy a shit tone of ASICS and try to push a 51%+ attack in coordination. If sometimes this happens by (allegedly) accident randomly, imagine if when the pool is close to 51%+, a lot of ASICS are turned on out of nowhere in that same pool pushing the % a lot higher.
hero member
Activity: 798
Merit: 1000
July 23, 2014, 07:19:58 AM
#4
This threat seems very, very likely at some point. The cost of an attack wouldn't actually be that much to pull off. Even a short term (i.e. much cheaper) attack could completely destabilize the faith people have in Bitcoin.

Are we just waiting for an attack to occur before actually doing anything?

An attacker that isn't motivated by money will eventually attempt an attack. This isn't an "if", it's a "when".

Some billionaire, inherited wealth rich kid could completely devastate Bitcoin for under $50 Million.

Some people love to wreck shit. Rich guys that love to wreck shit? It could get ugly.

Somebody console me. I want to be wrong. What am I overlooking?



Perhaps the reason this wouldn't happen is because there's nothing in wrecking bitcoin for the super rich? 50million to do it maybe, but in destroying bitcoin's credibility, there'll be no value resulting from any dastardly deeds I'm pretty sure.

Correct. The effects that it would have would be meaningless, and it can be blocked easily, but it's not a reason to ignore it.
newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
July 23, 2014, 07:18:32 AM
#3
This threat seems very, very likely at some point. The cost of an attack wouldn't actually be that much to pull off. Even a short term (i.e. much cheaper) attack could completely destabilize the faith people have in Bitcoin.

Are we just waiting for an attack to occur before actually doing anything?

An attacker that isn't motivated by money will eventually attempt an attack. This isn't an "if", it's a "when".

Some billionaire, inherited wealth rich kid could completely devastate Bitcoin for under $50 Million.

Some people love to wreck shit. Rich guys that love to wreck shit? It could get ugly.

Somebody console me. I want to be wrong. What am I overlooking?



Perhaps the reason this wouldn't happen is because there's nothing in wrecking bitcoin for the super rich? 50million to do it maybe, but in destroying bitcoin's credibility, there'll be no value resulting from any dastardly deeds I'm pretty sure.
member
Activity: 109
Merit: 10
July 23, 2014, 12:37:27 AM
#2
This threat seems very, very likely at some point. The cost of an attack wouldn't actually be that much to pull off. Even a short term (i.e. much cheaper) attack could completely destabilize the faith people have in Bitcoin.

Are we just waiting for an attack to occur before actually doing anything?

An attacker that isn't motivated by money will eventually attempt an attack. This isn't an "if", it's a "when".

Some billionaire, inherited wealth rich kid could completely devastate Bitcoin for under $50 Million.

Some people love to wreck shit. Rich guys that love to wreck shit? It could get ugly.

Somebody console me. I want to be wrong. What am I overlooking?


You can move to peercoin if you feel bitcoin is not safe enough, peercoin is more difficult to attack than bitcoin.
newbie
Activity: 53
Merit: 0
July 23, 2014, 12:34:56 AM
#1
..
Pages:
Jump to: