Quote from: Dan Kaminsky
A number of parties have >51% powers, and are not using them. If they were used, we'd probably see the masses arrive at a consensus to do something about it -- unless the powers weren't abused, and were used judiciously. Things get weird at this scale. The Queen of England retains interesting powers across the world, that she does not use very frequently (lest she lose them). Rarely used, extreme capabilities, that are nonetheless well known to exist -- this is a property of many systems that end up stable.
Pressure release valves. Just because something can be abused, doesn't mean it will be, or must be eliminated.
Pressure release valves. Just because something can be abused, doesn't mean it will be, or must be eliminated.
He seems to be claiming that there are multiple dark-miners with ASICs who have enough power to exceed the network, but are holding back for fear of damaging their mining profit. He's usually quite careful to not make claims he cant back up.
You would think someone in that position given the level of investment would not be likely to try double spending, but rather would be out for mining profit. Its an interesting dynamic though eh - restraint - maybe via explicit or implicit cartel if there are multiple. Probably some physical oligopoly mining analogy eg diamonds with reduced supply pacts to hold the price and profit up.
Kaminsky replied on the wired thread:
Quote from: Dan Kaminsky
Dan Kaminsky -> Adam Back -
It's not a coincidence that BTCGuild gets right up to 48% and stops, and the last group who spun up their ASICs got to 17-25% on first fire. There's a number of parties who can go ahead and grab 51%; everybody's holding back. (Of course, the dynamic of everyone holding back, is that once people aren't holding back a new equilibrium may form, the nature of which is really actually hard to judge. Great arms race to predict if you're in the business of selling arms though!)
Bitcoin will have a new work function in the next year, or there will be a new Bitcoin. Not actually sure which.
It's not a coincidence that BTCGuild gets right up to 48% and stops, and the last group who spun up their ASICs got to 17-25% on first fire. There's a number of parties who can go ahead and grab 51%; everybody's holding back. (Of course, the dynamic of everyone holding back, is that once people aren't holding back a new equilibrium may form, the nature of which is really actually hard to judge. Great arms race to predict if you're in the business of selling arms though!)
Bitcoin will have a new work function in the next year, or there will be a new Bitcoin. Not actually sure which.
I would think the reason to hold back is economic - if you had 100TH and you mine too hard at 50% spread across a few pools, you reduce your own profit as difficulty adjusts to you.
(Deleted my other post here - since Kaminsky posted his comments on the wired article)
Adam
