The attack on the network is not hostile - page 3.

newIndia

legendary

Activity: 2198

Merit: 1049

Quote from: Quantus on July 10, 2015, 09:36:08 AM

It should be clear to everyone by now that the attacker means us no harm.
Its been 5 days now and the transaction back log has leveled off between 40k and 50k.
It is clear the intention of this (ongoing) attack is to increase transaction fees.
If the top mining pools are behind this they might even be turning a profit.

It is clear that the intention of the attacker was not to harm bitcoin. They are trying to prove some point. But, that might not be what you guess here. They might be vying for a block size increase as well (I know that does not solve the problem altogether).

NewLiberty

legendary

Activity: 1204

Merit: 1002

Gresham's Lawyer

Miner revenue is up, but not by much. Fees are still a small fraction of the mining reward.

Quantus

legendary

Activity: 883

Merit: 1005

If they wanted to inflict damage, real damage they could have sent all that spam at once.
But the spam comes in waves starting and stopping to keep the backlog in a target area.

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3074

Interesting theory, but it's another way of saying that someone who intended transaction flooding as an attack has only really demonstrated that it's not much of an attack. Like so many of these sorts of things, we could have the proven perpetrator themselves telling us their motive, and we still couldn't prove that motive any more than they could. What's their next move, obtain more bitcoin for a bigger "attack"?

Quantus

legendary

Activity: 883

Merit: 1005

It should be clear to everyone by now that the attacker means us no harm.
Its been 5 days now and the transaction back log has leveled off between 40k and 50k.
It is clear the intention of this (ongoing) attack is to increase transaction fees.
If the top mining pools are behind this they might even be turning a profit.

EDIT to help others understand:

If they wanted to inflict damage, real damage they could have sent all that spam at once.
If this was just a "statement about block size" Then the attacker has failed; thus the attacker would ether give up or increase the rate of spam.

Topic: The attack on the network is not hostile - page 3. (Read 1948 times)