Topic: Ghash.io reached 45% (Read 3805 times)

The really strange thing is that each time Ghash decreases, unknown increases and vice versa...

Maybe Gex.io is solo mining? Ghash.io have only 28% now and uknown is bigger.

I don't know. You have 4300 blocks every month. If you want to hit one block, you need 0.025% of the network hashrate. This is about 3750 Gh/s. 30GH/s cost about 1000$, so you need about 100 000$ of equipment.
-> it's possible, but unlikely. Maybe this are some private pools. 10 people invest each 10 grand and mine together.

And solo miners?

Or even more damaging, an exclusive express transaction confirmation: "We ghash promise that no competitor of yours will be able to process quickly."

Maybe they are p2pools?
I saw it, too. GHash and BTC Guild have now together less than 50%...

if Ghash are so successful, why aren't clones popping up all over the place to reduce their market share?  I don't really get it.

Probably Ghash hiding their hashing power in unknown to not cause panic.

They can cause panic when they have their shorts ready 

Do you know what, I just realized that I still have some computing cycles since

http://www.distributed.net/Main_Page

just let me review some notes on my ancient books lib...  

+1 well said.

edit - and see "anti-fragile"

I read https://ghash.io/ghashio_press_release.pdf

But just in case..some contacts has been made in networking community (professionals from layer 3 below)

http://www.internetpulse.net/

http://www.cablemap.info/

and BTW, is pretty much easy to un-link their ISP main cable, as autonomus system. so from 45 tey will drop to ___ dont know just loads of orfans ...

1) You don't know whether it will or will not damage the Bitcoin network.  You're just extrapolating based on historical data.  But let's assume you're right for the sake of argument.

2) It's not just the network that is at stake, but the reputation of Bitcoin.  The more crashes we have, the slower people are to adopt it as both a store of value and payment mechanism.  That is why I made my comment.  When Bitcoin crashes, both wealth and confidence is destroyed.

Ultimately the miners answer to the holders and possible future holders. If the miners (attempt to) do something which the holders disagree with, they will quickly find themselves mining worthless coins. The economic majority holds the actual power.


I can agree with this.

Only 34% now.

You must have missed the second sentence:

Ghash.io has considerable power right now over Bitcoin. During peak periods, Bitcoin has hit its 7 transactions per second limit. If Bitcoin transaction volume continues to grow, it's going to hit that limit regularly. The block size and transaction rate limit cannot be increased unless ghash.io wants it increased. All they have to do is refuse to confirm blocks beyond the current 250KB limit.

Whenever the block chain has a big backlog of unconfirmed transactions, ghash.io is in charge of Bitcoin. They have the power now to effectively impose higher transaction fees, or favor some transactions over others. For example, Coinbase could cut a deal with ghash.io for "express transaction confirmation" - their transactions get processed first. That would be a win for Coinbase - their merchant shopping cart service needs fast confirmations.

The next big issue for Bitcoin may be "net neutrality".

Spoken like someone with no interest in Bitcoin beyond speculation.  Bravo.

I hope they get up over the magical 50% hump, let say 55% or higher.  It will in no way damage the Bitcoin network but talk about a FUD storm of Biblical proportions!!!

PANIC blood in the streets selling worldwide, everyone screaming 51% 51% 51% at the top of their lungs - none of them with the foggiest idea what a "51% attack" even means or what can or cannot be done by such an attack.

It would be a thing of BEAUTY.  I can see the possibility of a dip into the double digits as the lazy fucking media circle jerk around the story, referencing each other's "research" repeating the "BITCOIN IS DOOMED OMG SKY IS FALLING" story 24/7 all over the web and video.

I can't wait, moving cash into the exchanges and getting ready to buy.

You can do your part by posting as many threads as you can warning everyone of the horrible dangers that a single pool controlling over half of the hashing represents.  Make sure your post contains no actual facts or technical detail otherwise CNN will not be able to use your post and quote you!

Don't know, but if I were them, I'd probably try and hurry up the process ASAP.

mining pools are just one of the first steps in the evolution, a cumbersome child of quickly growing difficulty. p2pool would become a mining standard, I think in several years block rewards would be just equally split between all participating miners, without this "lottery" effect of large pools.

Since they're already getting close to 51% (let's face it 45% is pretty dang close), I would like to see them implement the feature of choosing your pool. If you purchase Gigahashes, and you really own them, you would think this would be an available option...

Just curious when they plan on allowing users to choose their own pool? When they reach 50.9% of hashing power?

yeah but the problem is the current price of their contracts isn't worth it

They did mention an option they're planning to implement to allow for mining hardware to be directed to other pools. Might use that to finish up mining with Slush's pool and then either go back to them or point them at something else like a Peercoin mining pool instead.

Let's face it, CEX.io and Cloudhashing.com have made mining a bit more accessible for those who don't want to jump through all the hoops of buying and setting up ASICs and FPGAs and end up worrying about software crashes or power consumption. In other words, it's the free market at hand.

If Bitcoin is going to be the currency of the future, it's going to take more than reassurances from mining pools that they'll act responsibly.  It's going to take more than people screaming on reddit to switch pools or else "teh sky will fal".  It'll take more than CEX lamely claiming they did not condone a double spend attack originating from their pool.  A protocol which secures billions of dollars of wealth (and potentially trillions) must enforce good behavior from consumers all the way to the miners.  This currency cannot assume that actors 1) will act in their own best interest and 2) have interests that are aligned with Bitcoin's success.

It's different this time (tm).  It doesn't matter if pools have exceeded 51% in the past with no ill effect.  We're talking $12 billion at stake here.  We're talking about a currency poised to replace the banking sector, sans regulatory interference.  We're talking about a technology that can replace credit cards.  To rely on the good behavior of market participants in ludicrous.

Bitcoin was the first of its kind.  A prototype, perhaps never intended for mass acceptance in its current form.  If we're going to make this prototype the gold standard of crypto-currencies, it's going to take more than name recognition + a shitload of miners with tremendous amounts of sunk capital cranking away if the code base itself is lacking in necessary features.  Bitcoin is at risk of becoming that stereotypical gigantic corporation, easily outflanked by the smaller, nimbler competition.  I hope I am wrong.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantitative_easing

i wouldn't call 5 years in "early", and it has nearly happened before. the main problem is that miners currently (and probably forever) are incentivised to join pools for a more reliable mining income, which is simply one tendency towards centralisation, similar to the tendency towards centralised exchanges (goxopoly) in the earlier years. however, i'm confident that the community as it stands today is both knowledgeable and active enough to avoid the possible crisis scenarios by leaving the pool if you are involved, monitoring the blockchain for suspicious transactions, and promoting awareness through various well-trafficked outlets like /r/bitcoin and these forums. we've shown incredible decentralised cooperation in the past and the entire story of the bitcoin project continues to amaze me as a proof of concept of how dishonest or irresponsible actors can be neutralised in decentralised systems far better than in the centralised ones to which we are accustomed.

--arepo

very true;

I admit I don't like this given GhashIO's history.

But when I first got into bitcoin, Deepbit (remember them) was 80% of the hash rate and they had 80%for a long time.

Deepbit at 80% didn't destroy the network because: 1) that is not in a pool's interest and 2) any attempts are highly public and would result in the majority of your subscriber base immediately leaving.

A pool is only as strong as the trust individuals place in it.

they did the "right thing" after reaching ~50%, and it seems that ghash.io will do the same: https://ghash.io/ghashio_press_release.pdf

Thanx.

Change the rules to something nobody likes and fork off, for all I care.

I was going to say:  how is the evil ghash.io going to change all the clients?  But you beat me to it...

Everyone's concerned about double-spending.  I'm more concerned about them changing the rules to something that nobody likes.

One pool of miners with a majority of the hashing power is not the same thing as one malicious entity that wants to harm/kill/double spend Bitcoins with a majority of the hashing.

So, relax.

I have been here for years.  The same "OMG the sky is falling" threads happened when DeepBit attained a majority of the hashing.  Where is DeepBit now?  Where is Bitcoin now?

So, relax.

good point

that's from the last 2016 blocks. last 24 hours is 40%

If anyone controlling 51% of the hash power is not a cause for concern at all then please provide your knowledge and relieve the concern instead of just sitting there and calling people dumb

It's sad to see people panic over this...another proof that a concerning number of humans are dumb.

Except BTC Guild did the right thing and didn't allow it to happen... it sounds like a different story with Ghash.io and wouldn't be surprised if there are some shady fuckers behind that group

It's not good, but this already happened before with BTC Guild...

and that article is pretty lame  

It's at 40% (https://blockchain.info/pools?timespan=24hrs) but yeah, kind of... why can't they be like BTC Guild and increase fess to something ridiculous like 40-50% to get miners to join other pools.

I'm not familiar with the mining side of bitcoin and what the implications are, but it's a little disappointing that one group can already gain 51% so early and quickly... when I heard about the 51% attack I thought that group would need an incredible amount of resource to pull that off which made it very unlikely to happen... but it seems like it is more likely to happen than not. Do miners get benefits for being among the pool in the 51%+ group?

ghash reaches 45% -> sane miners move elsewhere -> percent drops to 30.

of course, as long as people who skipped math in school continue to buy cex.io shares, the percentage would be high, but the power of the other (sane) part of the community is greater.

http://qz.com/165273/the-existential-threat-to-bitcoin-its-boosters-said-was-impossible-is-now-at-hand/#/h/39559,2/

Worry?