This is a very silly question because if a 51% attack is a realistic possibility — and if it does actually cause a problem — nothing any government does is going to help.
On the other hand if a 51% attack is not realistic or is ineffectual, then who cares?
So anyone who thinks a government should have a role in that would be welcome to spend many lifetimes in court arguing about it; meanwhile such attacks will either succeed or fail regardless.
There is no universe where a government declares such a thing illegal, and then is able to defend a cryptocurrency against it.
You may as well ask if a government should legislate the value of Pi. It could happen but maths would continue to work or not regardless.
Topic: Do you want Governments to make 51% attacks illegal? (Read 2319 times)
Ya'll just scared.
My $.02.
My $.02.
Let's say a government tried to enact a law to prevent 51% attacks, how do you regulate it?
"You may go no higher then 50% of the Global hash rate"....
No. Having 51% of the hashpower should not be illegal. Attempting to use that power to defraud someone should be, and probably already is. At least from a common sense point of view, issuing a transaction that pays Bob, and then issuing another transaction that sends the same coins to yourself instead of Bob, is a pretty unambiguous attempt to defraud. It's legality does not need to depend on you having 51%."You may go no higher then 50% of the Global hash rate"....
(Some people argue that double-spending can be a normal part of a payment protocol, eg for micro-payments. However, although those protocol may involve creating conflicting transactions, so far as I know only one of those transactions actually needs to get broadcast to the network. Still, it might be best to avoid naive legislation.)
Do you want Governments to make 51% attacks illegal?
Is a 51% attack something that clearly violates the non-aggression principle?
I think the Libertarian answer = No = People are free to try, but we can attempt to discourage them.
What are your thoughts?
EDIT:
This was placed in the Bitcoin section, but the topic also applies to "local crypto terrorists" who launch attacks against alt coins and then brag about it in the forum. If they could be easily caught, should they face criminal charges?
I dont want the government involved with Bitcoin any more than they already are. Is a 51% attack something that clearly violates the non-aggression principle?
I think the Libertarian answer = No = People are free to try, but we can attempt to discourage them.
What are your thoughts?
EDIT:
This was placed in the Bitcoin section, but the topic also applies to "local crypto terrorists" who launch attacks against alt coins and then brag about it in the forum. If they could be easily caught, should they face criminal charges?
Is this sudden interest in the 51% attack inspired by James D'Angelo's recent 2-part sensationalist video series, where he doesn't actually really understand what a 51% is and thinks everything is "selfish mining"?
Not really. The more involvement the government has in crypto, the worse and worse it will eventually become. At the end of the day all they care about is collecting tax revenues, so I am sure they would be charging the public a hefty sum of money "to prevent 51% attacks"
When BTC requires the help of the GOV you will know it has failed.
quick answer "NO", however it wouldn't surprise me as many governments will want their share of tax from crypto currency.
They can tax you when you trade bitcoin with fiat, but I don't think they can tax you in btc tx.
Do you want Governments to make 51% attacks illegal?
Is a 51% attack something that clearly violates the non-aggression principle?
I think the Libertarian answer = No = People are free to try, but we can attempt to discourage them.
What are your thoughts?
EDIT:
This was placed in the Bitcoin section, but the topic also applies to "local crypto terrorists" who launch attacks against alt coins and then brag about it in the forum. If they could be easily caught, should they face criminal charges?
Is a 51% attack something that clearly violates the non-aggression principle?
I think the Libertarian answer = No = People are free to try, but we can attempt to discourage them.
What are your thoughts?
EDIT:
This was placed in the Bitcoin section, but the topic also applies to "local crypto terrorists" who launch attacks against alt coins and then brag about it in the forum. If they could be easily caught, should they face criminal charges?
Its a very silly idea that wouldnt be effective in RL with governements not having necessary laws to arrest a altcoin murderer...
Dos attacks are illegal in many places. They still happen.
From a libertarian view, no. It would maybe prevent some individuals, but to what extent?
From a libertarian view, no. It would maybe prevent some individuals, but to what extent?
A 51% "attack" is not a Dos attack.
It's only hitting a coin with tons of hashing power.
Nothing illegal about it.
A DDOS attack is just hitting a server with tons of network connections.
Nothing illegal about it?
Not the same thing at all.
My $.02.
IT CANT BE MADE ILLEGAL.. I dont think so
Only mining equipment supressed etc.
Only mining equipment supressed etc.
Dos attacks are illegal in many places. They still happen.
From a libertarian view, no. It would maybe prevent some individuals, but to what extent?
From a libertarian view, no. It would maybe prevent some individuals, but to what extent?
A 51% "attack" is not a Dos attack.
It's only hitting a coin with tons of hashing power.
Nothing illegal about it.
A DDOS attack is just hitting a server with tons of network connections.
Nothing illegal about it?
What I really think of government should best be kept in between my ears.
Mother always says, if you don't have anything nice to say, then say nothing.
Mother always says, if you don't have anything nice to say, then say nothing.
Then may your shackles rest lightly and posterity forget that you were a brother.
The way to deal with bullies, including governments bullies, it to show them their proper place. That proper place is not deep in our pockets, homes, lives, decisions, etc.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-04-29/quote-day-larry-summers-elizabeth-warren-insiders-dont-criticize-other-insiders
The emperor is wearing no clothes!!! And he's armed and dangerous to you and I. Was that mean to say? Perhaps those with gentle sensibilities and heads firmly in the sand would say yes. I say the emperor needs to be told he's going full retard.
Quit being a coward, Beef. My moms mom said the earth was flat. She was wrong.
Actions speak louder than words.
And what have you done, o courageous one, to shed your shackles?
DDoS and hacking are illegal, but there are numerous DDoS and hacking attempts every day.
Even if 51% attacks becomes illegal, it won't prevent it from happening when people have ability and incentive to do it.
Even if 51% attacks becomes illegal, it won't prevent it from happening when people have ability and incentive to do it.
The thread is funny. How will the government prevent the 51% attacks? It can't. Just like it can't prevent tech savvy people from possessing and trading Bitcoins. 
If someone brags here on the forum about attacking an alt coin & people lose money (for example), and somehow it is very easy to identify them, then should they be arrested? (for "financial fraud"/or something)
The thread is funny. How will the government prevent the 51% attacks? It can't. Just like it can't prevent tech savvy people from possessing and trading Bitcoins.
I believe the community, and those in control of the majority shares should be held accountable for this. There should be a way to stop this from ever being an option.
Bitcoin core developers need to take the lead and introduce measures in the code to preempt such an attack in first place.
I do not know if that is possible. Is a POW/POS hybrid supposed to be safer/ "immune" from 51% attacks?
CryptogenicBullion makes that claim (or at least they used to), I'm not certain how it will work out long-term.
Let's say a government tried to enact a law to prevent 51% attacks, how do you regulate it?
...
...
Real good question.
This was placed in the Bitcoin section, but the topic also applies to "local crypto terrorists" who launch attacks against alt coins and then brag about it in the forum. If they could be easily caught, should they face criminal charges?
Let's say a government tried to enact a law to prevent 51% attacks, how do you regulate it?
"You may go no higher then 50% of the Global hash rate"....
In today's centralized hashing environment it could create "hash wars" to try to eliminate competition...
Todays hash rate % example:
ghash.io = 26%
Discus Fish = 17%
BTC Guild = 11%
BTC Guild and Discus Fish decide they no longer wish to compete against ghash.io, both simultaneously shut down for lets say 10 blocks, which would probably take less then an hour with a 28% global hash rate drop. Then they fire back up.
ghash.io clearly has more then 51% of the hash rate for that hour, what then?
"You may go no higher then 50% of the Global hash rate"....
In today's centralized hashing environment it could create "hash wars" to try to eliminate competition...
Todays hash rate % example:
ghash.io = 26%
Discus Fish = 17%
BTC Guild = 11%
BTC Guild and Discus Fish decide they no longer wish to compete against ghash.io, both simultaneously shut down for lets say 10 blocks, which would probably take less then an hour with a 28% global hash rate drop. Then they fire back up.
ghash.io clearly has more then 51% of the hash rate for that hour, what then?
If you want to prevent 51% attacks.
We need millions of low price low power low hashrate ASIC so everyone can mine
Now mining is only done by rich people that owns big server farms which is a danger to the security of BTC itself.
We need millions of low price low power low hashrate ASIC so everyone can mine
Now mining is only done by rich people that owns big server farms which is a danger to the security of BTC itself.
Jump to: