Topic: Should I be worried about the 51%? (Read 1493 times)
51% will always be a thing to worry about until there is a solution or the entire network runs on P2Pools, if any one pool (excluding p2p) has over 51% there will be the risk it will double spend and kill the Bitcoin economy.
we need to be vigilant. one should always worry about mining centralization (and 51% is not the only issue there). this is a real problem, and trusting the integrity of the blockchain to any one pool -- that has to end.
I wouldn't say you should be worried. In pain maybe, but not worried.
In my opinion the only danger it causes is the drop in btc price, and lack of adoption from the masses who think that btc has been compromised and has failed as a system. And the bad press only augments those two things.
Ghash wouldn't actually do an attack. Once they hit 51% they are going to be under the world microscope - the instant they try anything all the btc world will come down on them.
That being said, Ghash IS actively attacking bitcoin RIGHT NOW by allowing their hash rate to be that high. The attack they are doing is precisely the two things I mention above: devaluation and lack of confidence in the system.
In my opinion the only danger it causes is the drop in btc price, and lack of adoption from the masses who think that btc has been compromised and has failed as a system. And the bad press only augments those two things.
Ghash wouldn't actually do an attack. Once they hit 51% they are going to be under the world microscope - the instant they try anything all the btc world will come down on them.
That being said, Ghash IS actively attacking bitcoin RIGHT NOW by allowing their hash rate to be that high. The attack they are doing is precisely the two things I mention above: devaluation and lack of confidence in the system.
You should be very worried!
I guess I am going to be a dissenter and say: yes, you should be worried.
The one thing that separates Bitcoin from VISA, Paypal and the Banks is the distributed transaction ledger. Anybody can add to the transaction ledger so long as the expend sufficient resources: termed "proof-of-work". Having mining concentration so concentrated breaks the design assumptions of the protocol.
The first time this happened (with the DeepBit pool) self-regulation worked. This time, the culture appears to have changed. Instead of pulling their hash-power, many hashers are asking for a protocol change to mitigate the problem instead. Various developers have mentioned such emergency coding in the past, lending credence to that argument. However, in my opinion, if that comes pass: The Bitcoin experiment will have been a failure.
How A Mining Monopoly Can Attack Bitcoin
I also plan to complete selling half my BItcoin by Friday.
I am selling half of my Bitcoin holdings because of Ghash
Two reasons:
The one thing that separates Bitcoin from VISA, Paypal and the Banks is the distributed transaction ledger. Anybody can add to the transaction ledger so long as the expend sufficient resources: termed "proof-of-work". Having mining concentration so concentrated breaks the design assumptions of the protocol.
The first time this happened (with the DeepBit pool) self-regulation worked. This time, the culture appears to have changed. Instead of pulling their hash-power, many hashers are asking for a protocol change to mitigate the problem instead. Various developers have mentioned such emergency coding in the past, lending credence to that argument. However, in my opinion, if that comes pass: The Bitcoin experiment will have been a failure.
How A Mining Monopoly Can Attack Bitcoin
I also plan to complete selling half my BItcoin by Friday.
I am selling half of my Bitcoin holdings because of Ghash
Two reasons:
- I need the money
- I don't believe for a minute that Ghash.io shut-down or redirected any hash-power; other than to solo mining.
I agree, sadly. Bitcoin runs on the assumption that at least half the network is acting "morally," so to speak. I'm afraid that this is no longer true.
I guess I am going to be a dissenter and say: yes, you should be worried.
The one thing that separates Bitcoin from VISA, Paypal and the Banks is the distributed transaction ledger. Anybody can add to the transaction ledger so long as the expend sufficient resources: termed "proof-of-work". Having mining concentration so concentrated breaks the design assumptions of the protocol.
The first time this happened (with the DeepBit pool) self-regulation worked. This time, the culture appears to have changed. Instead of pulling their hash-power, many hashers are asking for a protocol change to mitigate the problem instead. Various developers have mentioned such emergency coding in the past, lending credence to that argument. However, in my opinion, if that comes pass: The Bitcoin experiment will have been a failure.
How A Mining Monopoly Can Attack Bitcoin
I also plan to complete selling half my BItcoin by Friday.
I am selling half of my Bitcoin holdings because of Ghash
Two reasons:
The one thing that separates Bitcoin from VISA, Paypal and the Banks is the distributed transaction ledger. Anybody can add to the transaction ledger so long as the expend sufficient resources: termed "proof-of-work". Having mining concentration so concentrated breaks the design assumptions of the protocol.
The first time this happened (with the DeepBit pool) self-regulation worked. This time, the culture appears to have changed. Instead of pulling their hash-power, many hashers are asking for a protocol change to mitigate the problem instead. Various developers have mentioned such emergency coding in the past, lending credence to that argument. However, in my opinion, if that comes pass: The Bitcoin experiment will have been a failure.
How A Mining Monopoly Can Attack Bitcoin
I also plan to complete selling half my BItcoin by Friday.
I am selling half of my Bitcoin holdings because of Ghash
Two reasons:
- I need the money
- I don't believe for a minute that Ghash.io shut-down or redirected any hash-power; other than to solo mining.
DDoS isn't "democracy". Thats like shooting people and going "SEE DEMOCRACY?"
Right now, no.
Quite the opposite, you should be pleased.
Bitcoin encodes decentralization and democracy - an issue was noticed in a multi-billion dollar economy, and within hours people had voted with their miners and redistributed a vast amount of hardware resources to stabilize the economy.
To me this is one of the pivotal moments of bitcoin so far, this democratic process implemented with such speed is impossible in almost every other avenue of life, and certainly every avenue which has centralization at it's core.
It was a good day.
It was closer to weeks than hours.
wow, with an activity of 252 you trust a bulgarian news site 
? or is it irony?
if you think BTC is a secure investement (or invention) : sell now!
Well I am Bulgarian and also this site is one of the biggest economics related sites in Bulgaria. But Yes for sure no Bulgarian knows as much as in US. ? or is it irony?if you think BTC is a secure investement (or invention) : sell now!
BR
Quite the opposite, you should be pleased.
Bitcoin encodes decentralization and democracy - an issue was noticed in a multi-billion dollar economy, and within hours people had voted with their miners and redistributed a vast amount of hardware resources to stabilize the economy.
To me this is one of the pivotal moments of bitcoin so far, this democratic process implemented with such speed is impossible in almost every other avenue of life, and certainly every avenue which has centralization at it's core.
It was a good day.
Not true.
People where still mining at GHash even after they reached 51%.
It's the DDoS attack that caused the miners to move.
No..Ghash moved part of their own hardware to another pool. Most people care only about one thing....returning their investment into bitcoin miner....and i cant blame them.
I think BitFury also withdrew 1PH (I think) from the hashing rates.
That being said, why didn't they do it before it got to that?
It is a serious question.
Why didn't they start backing down when they were at 45% let's say?
As some say, it was show off of power....i dont really know why didint they do something before it happened....They could have reject new miners etc...i dont know...
wow, with an activity of 252 you trust a bulgarian news site ? or is it irony?
if you think BTC is a secure investement (or invention) : sell now!
? or is it irony?if you think BTC is a secure investement (or invention) : sell now!
I think BitFury also withdrew 1PH (I think) from the hashing rates.
That being said, why didn't they do it before it got to that?
It is a serious question.
Why didn't they start backing down when they were at 45% let's say?
That being said, why didn't they do it before it got to that?
It is a serious question.
Why didn't they start backing down when they were at 45% let's say?
I also wonder this, the simple answer is probably greed.
However this has been coming for a long time, many months ago I was shocked and concerned that 6+ blocks could be found in a row by the pool in question.
Quite the opposite, you should be pleased.
Bitcoin encodes decentralization and democracy - an issue was noticed in a multi-billion dollar economy, and within hours people had voted with their miners and redistributed a vast amount of hardware resources to stabilize the economy.
To me this is one of the pivotal moments of bitcoin so far, this democratic process implemented with such speed is impossible in almost every other avenue of life, and certainly every avenue which has centralization at it's core.
It was a good day.
Not true.
People where still mining at GHash even after they reached 51%.
It's the DDoS attack that caused the miners to move.
No..Ghash moved part of their own hardware to another pool. Most people care only about one thing....returning their investment into bitcoin miner....and i cant blame them.
I think BitFury also withdrew 1PH (I think) from the hashing rates.
That being said, why didn't they do it before it got to that?
It is a serious question.
Why didn't they start backing down when they were at 45% let's say?
Quite the opposite, you should be pleased.
Bitcoin encodes decentralization and democracy - an issue was noticed in a multi-billion dollar economy, and within hours people had voted with their miners and redistributed a vast amount of hardware resources to stabilize the economy.
To me this is one of the pivotal moments of bitcoin so far, this democratic process implemented with such speed is impossible in almost every other avenue of life, and certainly every avenue which has centralization at it's core.
It was a good day.
Not true.
People where still mining at GHash even after they reached 51%.
It's the DDoS attack that caused the miners to move.
No..Ghash moved part of their own hardware to another pool. Most people care only about one thing....returning their investment into bitcoin miner....and i cant blame them. DDos is not solution, nor is moving hardware from one pool in one's possesion to another pool in one's possesion. I'm afraid it needs to be dealt with on protocol level and it turns out that it's hard thing to fix...
OP....as you can see, price is going up even tho one pool had 51%, as if nothing happened. I think that should be enough to answer your question.
Quite the opposite, you should be pleased.
Bitcoin encodes decentralization and democracy - an issue was noticed in a multi-billion dollar economy, and within hours people had voted with their miners and redistributed a vast amount of hardware resources to stabilize the economy.
To me this is one of the pivotal moments of bitcoin so far, this democratic process implemented with such speed is impossible in almost every other avenue of life, and certainly every avenue which has centralization at it's core.
It was a good day.
Not true.
People where still mining at GHash even after they reached 51%.
It's the DDoS attack that caused the miners to move.
DDoS or not, it was resolved democratically by the community. If some members took an action which prompted a resolution so be it, it worked - what I said still holds, this is a major situation resolved remarkably quicker than any other issue in any billion dollar company/org/economy we've ever seen in history.
True, can't argue with that.
I was just making a correction
Quite the opposite, you should be pleased.
Bitcoin encodes decentralization and democracy - an issue was noticed in a multi-billion dollar economy, and within hours people had voted with their miners and redistributed a vast amount of hardware resources to stabilize the economy.
To me this is one of the pivotal moments of bitcoin so far, this democratic process implemented with such speed is impossible in almost every other avenue of life, and certainly every avenue which has centralization at it's core.
It was a good day.
Not true.
People where still mining at GHash even after they reached 51%.
It's the DDoS attack that caused the miners to move.
DDoS or not, it was resolved democratically by the community. If some members took an action which prompted a resolution so be it, it worked - what I said still holds, this is a major situation resolved remarkably quicker than any other issue in any billion dollar company/org/economy we've ever seen in history.
Quite the opposite, you should be pleased.
Bitcoin encodes decentralization and democracy - an issue was noticed in a multi-billion dollar economy, and within hours people had voted with their miners and redistributed a vast amount of hardware resources to stabilize the economy.
To me this is one of the pivotal moments of bitcoin so far, this democratic process implemented with such speed is impossible in almost every other avenue of life, and certainly every avenue which has centralization at it's core.
It was a good day.
Not true.
People where still mining at GHash even after they reached 51%.
It's the DDoS attack that caused the miners to move.
Jump to: