Pages:
Author

Topic: Positive Bitcoin write-up on Zerohedge (Read 4382 times)

legendary
Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349
Eadem mutata resurgo
February 03, 2013, 07:58:18 PM
#50
Quote
I suspect at least 3 different governments consider Bitcoin an 'asset' of theirs, and each have >50Th reserve hashing power (reserve = sitting there, not plugged in)

Oh boy ... which orifice did you pull that from? ... more blowhards ... i guess it is kind of fun living in a fantasy world ... "debate" all you want, I'll leave you to your Decepticons kids.
legendary
Activity: 1638
Merit: 1001
₪``Campaign Manager´´₪
member
Activity: 67
Merit: 11
vip
Activity: 571
Merit: 504
I still <3 u Satoshi
February 03, 2013, 06:36:08 AM
#47
 Oh look, its this thread again.
http://gavintech.blogspot.com/2012/05/neutralizing-51-attack.html?m=0

So not only getting the majority of the hashing power and maintaining it prohibiting, its only trivial for us to thwart.

This is why we wont see a 51% attack. The attacker would just be throwing money down a pit.
member
Activity: 67
Merit: 11
February 03, 2013, 03:38:54 AM
#46
So the evil master plan would go like this:
1. Invest in enough computing power to control the majority of the network, you control the blockchain now.
2. Stop integrating blocks mined by others in the blockchain.
2.5 Bitcoin is patched, other miners continue on their own chain.
Can you explain what kind of patch you mean? A patch that says the shortest blockchain counts instead of the longest? A patch that privileges a few miners, saying that their blocks must be included in the block chain? A one-time update to the client that hard-codes an alternative (shorter) chain of blocks to be accepted?
legendary
Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349
Eadem mutata resurgo
February 02, 2013, 08:21:48 PM
#45

Is this forum now fully invested with blowhards these days?  Roll Eyes

... its kind of like watching 7yos talk about what-if techno-monsters that are engaged in make believe battles.

"... and then the Master Megatron dropped out of warp drive and descended on to the bitcoin network with the might and fury of the Decepticons from planet Cybertron ... "

okay kids you had your fun how about find another play-pen?
legendary
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1008
If you want to walk on water, get out of the boat
February 02, 2013, 07:22:09 PM
#44
Quote
For example, you could stop processing transactions with a fee lower than 1 BTC.
The instant you achieve such control, bitcoin would die because everyone would stop using it.

legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002
February 02, 2013, 07:20:49 PM
#43
I don't know. Maybe you're right. At this stage I think it's a moot point though -- why destroy Bitcoin when you can control it? And why advertise your power and risk losing everything?
Because you can't print bitcoins at will like with fiat money. They want to protect their power to print money at will and defend their privileges. Destroying bitcoin does this and about losing... what, some millions of $? They have hundreds of billions!

Note that while controlling the majority of the Bitcoin network does not allow you to print Bitcoin, it allows you to raise fees arbitrarily. For example, you could stop processing transactions with a fee lower than 1 BTC.

So the evil master plan would go like this:
1. Invest in enough computing power to control the majority of the network, you control the blockchain now.
2. Stop integrating blocks mined by others in the blockchain.
2.5 Bitcoin is patched, other miners continue on their own chain.
Quote
3. Stop including transactions with a fee less than X, forcing users to give larger fees.
4. Earn lots of transaction fees.
5. Invest transaction fees into more computing power in order to keep the majority.
6. The other miners will starve one by one as they won't be able to earn anything anymore.
7. BitGovcoin is now a monopoly which you own.
8. Bitcoin is still happily chugging along.
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002
February 02, 2013, 07:17:33 PM
#42
Quote
I think they would fail even if they attempted it
That is the problem. If they attempt they will of course succeed, since it is not hard at all.

You're welcome to your opinion.
member
Activity: 67
Merit: 11
February 02, 2013, 07:16:27 PM
#41
I don't know. Maybe you're right. At this stage I think it's a moot point though -- why destroy Bitcoin when you can control it? And why advertise your power and risk losing everything?
Because you can't print bitcoins at will like with fiat money. They want to protect their power to print money at will and defend their privileges. Destroying bitcoin does this and about losing... what, some millions of $? They have hundreds of billions!

Note that while controlling the majority of the Bitcoin network does not allow you to print Bitcoin, it allows you to raise fees arbitrarily. For example, you could stop processing transactions with a fee lower than 1 BTC.

So the evil master plan would go like this:
1. Invest in enough computing power to control the majority of the network, you control the blockchain now.
2. Stop integrating blocks mined by others in the blockchain.
3. Stop including transactions with a fee less than X, forcing users to give larger fees.
4. Earn lots of transaction fees.
5. Invest transaction fees into more computing power in order to keep the majority.
6. The other miners will starve one by one as they won't be able to earn anything anymore.
7. Bitcoin is now a monopoly which you own.
legendary
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1008
If you want to walk on water, get out of the boat
February 02, 2013, 07:03:15 PM
#40
Quote
I think they would fail even if they attempted it
That is the problem. If they attempt they will of course succeed, since it is not hard at all.
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002
February 02, 2013, 06:49:40 PM
#39
Don't they spend hundreds of billions in military each year?

Quote
all you got out of it was some bitcoins that cost you more to produce than the average miner.
Lol. What is not clear "their aim is to destroy bitcoin, not profit"

It's perfectly clear, and as the beginning of that sentence stated, I think they would fail even if they attempted it.  Way to take things out of context and then argue with a point that wasn't made.
legendary
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1008
If you want to walk on water, get out of the boat
February 01, 2013, 09:06:16 AM
#38
I guess in order to actually disrupt the network, you would need to crowd-out most transactions, so you would need to consistently mine several blocks in a row, not just 1 in 2. So, even if you get say ~80% of the network power, Bitcoin could still be usable as long as the blocks are normally less than 20% full (and all the transactions can be crammed into 1-in-5 blocks).

Couldn't the attacker just invalidate previous "correct" blocks with transactions by not including them in their (longest) chain?
Yes, he can

I don't know. Maybe you're right. At this stage I think it's a moot point though -- why destroy Bitcoin when you can control it? And why advertise your power and risk losing everything?
Because you can't print bitcoins at will like with fiat money. They want to protect their power to print money at will and defend their privileges. Destroying bitcoin does this and about losing... what, some millions of $? They have hundreds of billions!
legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1001
February 01, 2013, 08:59:44 AM
#37
I guess in order to actually disrupt the network, you would need to crowd-out most transactions, so you would need to consistently mine several blocks in a row, not just 1 in 2. So, even if you get say ~80% of the network power, Bitcoin could still be usable as long as the blocks are normally less than 20% full (and all the transactions can be crammed into 1-in-5 blocks).

Couldn't the attacker just invalidate previous "correct" blocks with transactions by not including them in their (longest) chain?

I don't know. Maybe you're right. At this stage I think it's a moot point though -- why destroy Bitcoin when you can control it? And why advertise your power and risk losing everything?

Exactly... If I had a bone to pick with Bitcoin and had 10 million dollars lying around, I could do a lot more without even thinking of mining that by trying a 51% attack.
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
February 01, 2013, 02:26:29 AM
#36
Nice work on that zerohedge thread Hazek.


Thanks, I do my best.

Hazek, TraderTimm, and Half_A_Billion_Hollow_Points pretty much crushed all the ignorant comment trolls without breaking any kind of intellectual sweat.

Well done and thank you, gentlemen.
legendary
Activity: 1638
Merit: 1001
₪``Campaign Manager´´₪
January 31, 2013, 09:37:34 PM
#35
I guess in order to actually disrupt the network, you would need to crowd-out most transactions, so you would need to consistently mine several blocks in a row, not just 1 in 2. So, even if you get say ~80% of the network power, Bitcoin could still be usable as long as the blocks are normally less than 20% full (and all the transactions can be crammed into 1-in-5 blocks).

Couldn't the attacker just invalidate previous "correct" blocks with transactions by not including them in their (longest) chain?
legendary
Activity: 2408
Merit: 1121
January 31, 2013, 08:50:16 PM
#34
I don't get it Gabi - the wiki says a 51% attack is more than 50% of the network's computing power.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power

Bitcoin Charts says the Network total hashing power is ~ 29.773 TeraHashes/sec

51% = 15.18423 TeraHashes/sec, not 29.773 + 15.18423...

Anyway, I think it is pretty apparent the logistics aren't exactly trivial.


The point is that if you were to start from scratch, you'd have to reach 51% of the current hashing power PLUS the one you'd have to get to defeat it. Let's say current power is 30 Tera, if you went and bought 15, they'd be added to it for a total of 45. Now your 15 wouldn't be half of the total anymore.

Ah I get it --- haha, can't believe I missed that. Thanks guys - guess you learn something every day Smiley My mistake.
legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1001
January 31, 2013, 08:35:23 PM
#33
I don't get it Gabi - the wiki says a 51% attack is more than 50% of the network's computing power.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power

Bitcoin Charts says the Network total hashing power is ~ 29.773 TeraHashes/sec

51% = 15.18423 TeraHashes/sec, not 29.773 + 15.18423...

Anyway, I think it is pretty apparent the logistics aren't exactly trivial.


The point is that if you were to start from scratch, you'd have to reach 51% of the current hashing power PLUS the one you'd have to get to defeat it. Let's say current power is 30 Tera, if you went and bought 15, they'd be added to it for a total of 45. Now your 15 wouldn't be half of the total anymore.
legendary
Activity: 2408
Merit: 1121
January 31, 2013, 08:14:30 PM
#32
I don't get it Gabi - the wiki says a 51% attack is more than 50% of the network's computing power.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power

Bitcoin Charts says the Network total hashing power is ~ 29.773 TeraHashes/sec

51% = 15.18423 TeraHashes/sec, not 29.773 + 15.18423...

Anyway, I think it is pretty apparent the logistics aren't exactly trivial.
cho
full member
Activity: 155
Merit: 100
Boar with me
January 31, 2013, 05:09:17 PM
#31
At some point, we might be talking about the Bitcoin network being attacked by the very powers that are emitting fiat money. Sounds logical to me that fiat money emitters try to protect fiat money.
At that point, a network attack might be funded with billions of dollars.
A billion dollar invested in the protection of your 1000-billion-quantitative-easings-emitting-central-bank looks like a sound investment.
Also remember that some gov / intelligence agencies have been producing ASICs for a variety of purposes for decades. Some of them have got the skills to design and produce their own ASIC devices.
Question is, by the time bitcoin looks threatening to a central bank, how much dollars will it really need to throw at the fire to extinguish it ? How much effort would it have to go through in order to get away with such an attack, from a public opinion point of view ?
Pages:
Jump to: