Pages:
Author

Topic: 51% attack - page 5. (Read 5157 times)

full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 101
April 16, 2014, 03:04:21 PM
#29
I don't think many people would prefer having their loved ones injured or killed, being tortured or any kind of that stuff to defend bitcoin..
But I could always be wrong, let's hope they will never be put in that position.
I don't see what anyone could actually gain from doing such a thing, it sounds like pure evil, doing it for the sake of doing it.
full member
Activity: 140
Merit: 100
April 16, 2014, 03:02:04 PM
#28
I don't think many people would prefer having their loved ones injured or killed, being tortured or any kind of that stuff to defend bitcoin..
But I could always be wrong, let's hope they will never be put in that position.
full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 101
April 16, 2014, 02:58:43 PM
#27
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bi2thGzzNSs

seems like it's alot easier then some people claimed...
bribing 3 mining pool owners is much cheaper then buying the equipment

Never thought of it that way, good remark.
Let's hope this will never happen. They don't even need to be bribed, governments or criminal organizations could use other ways to force the pool owners to comply using other, more drastic methods.
Meh, lets hope they till the end fight for the community and don't let anything bribe / threaten them.
full member
Activity: 140
Merit: 100
April 16, 2014, 02:52:09 PM
#26
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bi2thGzzNSs

seems like it's alot easier then some people claimed...
bribing 3 mining pool owners is much cheaper then buying the equipment

Never thought of it that way, good remark.
Let's hope this will never happen. They don't even need to be bribed, governments or criminal organizations could use other ways to force the pool owners to comply using other, more drastic methods.
sr. member
Activity: 365
Merit: 251
April 16, 2014, 02:47:22 PM
#25
IF a 51% attack truly did happen then Litecoin could just step up to the #1 slot. Then if a 51% attack happened to Litecoin (Completely different hardware required) then a CPU based coin like Primecoin would step up.
etc..
While it's true that bitcoin miners might want to switch, they are in the same boat as the attacker: their ASIC hardware is no good for the altcoin. So the hashrate of the altcoin will be much lower. Also, for non-ASIC currencies the attacker could probably rent cloud servers from Amazon or someone, so the capital cost of an attack would be lower.
hero member
Activity: 672
Merit: 500
http://fuk.io - check it out!
April 14, 2014, 08:24:15 PM
#24
ud need LOADS of cash to bribe the 3 pools + be sure they wont tell.

imo impossible.
legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1029
April 14, 2014, 03:06:05 PM
#23
This has been a common topic for years.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
April 14, 2014, 02:35:00 PM
#22
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bi2thGzzNSs

seems like it's alot easier then some people claimed...

So someone will buy 1 billion worth of machines to destroy bitcoin. The thing is if someone buys that much of ASIC power it will increase the value of bitcoin because that would be the number one news on Coindesk, bloomberg, etc for a while. That someone would have increased his capital just by simply buying the gear. Next is the 51% attack to destroy bitcoin. Way before the value of bitcoin goes down to zero, a lot of bitcoiners would have converted to another alt coin, making that new alt coin the new Gold crypto. Since his Asic were specifically made for bitcoin mining, that someone will need to invest in another billion to break that new gold crypto.
Meanwhile investors are looking into that someone (most likely an evil bank in that scenario) and wonder why their money is spent so foolishly then will force a change the board direction or walk with their captial.

You don't need 1 billion to kill bitcoin. You would need multiple of billions and even that does not guaranty anything.

Does that story make sense to you?

Can you please explain your calculations again?

The current hashrate is 55,000 Th/s.

Each Th/s at this time costs around $2,500 (maybe lower in huge orders).
In order to hit the 51% , you need at least lets say 30,000Th/s , to make sure by the time they get delivered you can counter it.

So $2,500 X 30,000Th/s = $75,000,000 approximately.

With $75,000,000, you can potentially control the whole BTC network.

Not close to a billion you say.

Who said that was my calculation? I clicked on the link and watched the video in the OP. Do the same you will see where that number came from.
Why would any bitcoiner NOT leave and transfers to the next alt coin if that scenario was coming, no matter 1 billion or 75M?
sr. member
Activity: 543
Merit: 250
April 14, 2014, 01:31:52 PM
#21
IF a 51% attack truly did happen then Litecoin could just step up to the #1 slot. Then if a 51% attack happened to Litecoin (Completely different hardware required) then a CPU based coin like Primecoin would step up.
etc..
Not gonna happen.
hero member
Activity: 728
Merit: 500
April 14, 2014, 12:40:30 PM
#20
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bi2thGzzNSs

seems like it's alot easier then some people claimed...

So someone will buy 1 billion worth of machines to destroy bitcoin. The thing is if someone buys that much of ASIC power it will increase the value of bitcoin because that would be the number one news on Coindesk, bloomberg, etc for a while. That someone would have increased his capital just by simply buying the gear. Next is the 51% attack to destroy bitcoin. Way before the value of bitcoin goes down to zero, a lot of bitcoiners would have converted to another alt coin, making that new alt coin the new Gold crypto. Since his Asic were specifically made for bitcoin mining, that someone will need to invest in another billion to break that new gold crypto.
Meanwhile investors are looking into that someone (most likely an evil bank in that scenario) and wonder why their money is spent so foolishly then will force a change the board direction or walk with their captial.

You don't need 1 billion to kill bitcoin. You would need multiple of billions and even that does not guaranty anything.

Does that story make sense to you?

Can you please explain your calculations again?

The current hashrate is 55,000 Th/s.

Each Th/s at this time costs around $2,500 (maybe lower in huge orders).
In order to hit the 51% , you need at least lets say 30,000Th/s , to make sure by the time they get delivered you can counter it.

So $2,500 X 30,000Th/s = $75,000,000 approximately.

With $75,000,000, you can potentially control the whole BTC network.

Not close to a billion you say.
legendary
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1001
April 14, 2014, 11:38:27 AM
#19
 he explains this pretty good
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
April 14, 2014, 11:14:07 AM
#18
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bi2thGzzNSs

seems like it's alot easier then some people claimed...

So someone will buy 1 billion worth of machines to destroy bitcoin. The thing is if someone buys that much of ASIC power it will increase the value of bitcoin because that would be the number one news on Coindesk, bloomberg, etc for a while. That someone would have increased his capital just by simply buying the gear. Next is the 51% attack to destroy bitcoin. Way before the value of bitcoin goes down to zero, a lot of bitcoiners would have converted to another alt coin, making that new alt coin the new Gold crypto. Since his Asic were specifically made for bitcoin mining, that someone will need to invest in another billion to break that new gold crypto.
Meanwhile investors are looking into that someone (most likely an evil bank in that scenario) and wonder why their money is spent so foolishly then will force a change the board direction or walk with their captial.

You don't need 1 billion to kill bitcoin. You would need multiple of billions and even that does not guaranty anything.

Does that story make sense to you?
legendary
Activity: 2296
Merit: 1014
April 14, 2014, 10:09:39 AM
#17
its just speculation, nothing really new
sr. member
Activity: 336
Merit: 260
April 14, 2014, 09:44:10 AM
#16
That's why diversifying into NXT, which is already now protected against 51% (and even against 90% when TF feature is completed later) attack makes perfect sense. Another one that protects users better against 51% attack is Myriadcoin.
legendary
Activity: 2170
Merit: 1094
April 14, 2014, 09:26:12 AM
#15
Since the 18th March there seems to be a significant increase in orphan blocks and possibly in transaction times.
Could this be a sign of a 'selfish miner' attack?
legendary
Activity: 4410
Merit: 4766
April 14, 2014, 07:17:12 AM
#14
Bribing the 3 pools is actually pointless. Ultimately, they'd be the ones losing out as after a 51% attack nobody would want to mine anymore. They lose miners, they lose fees... Won't benefit them really. (Unless the bribe is HUGE).
Still, won't actually happen!

you would be surprised if i told you that many people are not bitcoin 'lifers' they dont care about the future of bitcoin, they just want wealth now to cash out to fiat.

as for not wanting to do it because it would ruin rep. .. pirate had a price in mind of how much he deemed as 'enough' before running, mark karpeles had a figure in mind before he decided to screw people over. i bet if i offered anyone here $10m just to install some code on their server. knowing that although bitcoin would be screwed they would atleast have $10m to play with instantly . which would have taken 10-12* years to get, by just continuing to run bitcoinpools. miners are very visibly greedy and would definetely be tempted by a instant $10m payout for 5 minutes work.

which would put the 51% attack price as low as $30m, maybe less


*at todays fiat price calculated against the 1% pool fee and average blocks per hour/day/year/10 year
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1012
April 14, 2014, 07:03:41 AM
#13
it's because p2pool is more "bitcoin complain" ... (decentralized way of mining).
legendary
Activity: 3178
Merit: 1348
April 14, 2014, 06:39:41 AM
#12
Bribing the 3 pools is actually pointless. Ultimately, they'd be the ones losing out as after a 51% attack nobody would want to mine anymore. They lose miners, they lose fees... Won't benefit them really. (Unless the bribe is HUGE).
Still, won't actually happen!
legendary
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1014
In Satoshi I Trust
April 14, 2014, 06:32:43 AM
#11
after that we could switch to Litecoin   Wink
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1012
April 14, 2014, 06:25:21 AM
#10
it's doesn't happen.
bank are rich with virtual money ... when you buy physical stuff, they have always a problem.



that why credit card security and bank security (internet) is poor compared to the bitcoin secure transaction system and mining adaptative power.
Pages:
Jump to: