Topic: This is why Ghash sucks and is worse than you think. - page 2. (Read 4122 times)

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on June 25, 2014, 02:40:12 AM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on June 25, 2014, 02:30:05 AM

I wonder if they would they notice the decrease in price before it's too late? When I was mining heavily I would go for days without even checking my miners. Pissed me off one time because I found a blown hd5970 and checked my hash rate on Deepbit only to find out that it stopped working 3 days prior.

Didn't you just answer your own question?

Good, then I made my point. They wouldn't notice before it's too late. That argument is flawed.

The remedy of a decrease in price if a pool passes a threshold is also ridiculous because they may not be in it for the money. They may be a mini LukeJr clone and just be interested in the destruction.

I don't see the problem. Those who fear a 51% attack will divest themselves of bitcoins, those who do not will not.

This entire thing is build on economic incentives.

In other words, we won't fix this ahead of time any more than we fixed transaction malleability before people lost money so you need to fuck off and take your money out of Bitcoin if you don't want to lose it. Yeah, mass adoption is right around the corner dude. lol

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on June 25, 2014, 02:30:05 AM

I wonder if they would they notice the decrease in price before it's too late? When I was mining heavily I would go for days without even checking my miners. Pissed me off one time because I found a blown hd5970 and checked my hash rate on Deepbit only to find out that it stopped working 3 days prior.

Didn't you just answer your own question?

Good, then I made my point. They wouldn't notice before it's too late. That argument is flawed.

The remedy of a decrease in price if a pool passes a threshold is also ridiculous because they may not be in it for the money. They may be a mini LukeJr clone and just be interested in the destruction.

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

I wonder if they would they notice the decrease in price before it's too late? When I was mining heavily I would go for days without even checking my miners. Pissed me off one time because I found a blown hd5970 and checked my hash rate on Deepbit only to find out that it stopped working 3 days prior.

ShakyhandsBTCer

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

It's Money 2.0| It’s gold for nerds | It's Bitcoin

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on June 24, 2014, 06:07:37 PM

Quote from: seriouscoin on June 24, 2014, 05:33:03 PM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on June 24, 2014, 02:38:33 PM

Quote from: seriouscoin on June 24, 2014, 02:05:03 PM

It doesn't matter if the honest nodes don't want to accept anything from the attacker.
The attacker has enough hashrate to change the rules.

How is the attacker (a miner and node(s)) going to force me to change the software (node) on my computer so he can modify the rules of the protocol?

Easy, he can't.

Quote from: seriouscoin on June 24, 2014, 05:33:03 PM

Seriously, either I didn't get what a 51% ownership of the network is, or you still don't understand the dangers of it.
Don't know which.

Maybe someone more knowledgeable on the subject can elaborate.......

Have you read the wiki which gives a very simple explanation of what an attacker with a lot of hash power can and can not do?

Have you?

Please stop arguing when you dont understand crap.

Having a longest chain doesnt mean they can change the rules. The rules are set by nodes.

In the event of 51%, there will be a folk of blockchains. The network can react by completely ignore blocks from the attacker (updating client required). This is a complete hard fork. Hence we only see this as disruptive attack. Its still a damage to bitcoin.

Now, since GHash is a pool, the second they do this attack, its clients will move their hashrate else where and GHash will have nothing but shot themself in the foot.

The practicality of this attack is close to nil. There is better way of hurting btc for far less the cost.

CoiledCoin used merged mining similar to Namecoin. LukeJr was able to use Eligius' combined hashing power to execute a 51% attack against the new CoiledCoin blockchain. The Eligius-mined blocks contained no transactions, effectively slowing the function of the Coiledcoin network to a crawl. The same could be done with Bitcoin.

I don't really think Ghash.IO has any intent to do anything but profit from being the largest pool any more than I thought Tycho intended to harm Bitcoin when Deepbit was the front runner. The possibility exists that a government or other entity that wants to harm Bitcoin does not need to invest a fortune in equipment to do damage. They can simply use your equipment to do it. PoW is a flaw that needs to be corrected before Bitcoin exits beta and becomes production software. Many would say Bitcoin is no longer in beta because the market cap says so. If that's true then this problem needs to be solved now before anyone loses any more money to this experiment.

You're missing a key point is that ~~Eligius~~ Bitcoin miners dont mine or care ~~for scamcoins~~ about anything but profit hence ~~Luke~~ Ghash can effectively disrupt the network for a long time (he becomes a single largest miner in the Bitcoin ~~that scamcoin's~~ network).

Another point is the remaining miners ~~scamcoin's participants~~ are not robust enough to effectively ignore Ghash.IO~~Eligius~~. Everyone is in it for pump and dump including many Bitcoiners ( get rich quick scheme)

FIFY

If ghash were to launch this kind of attack then the value of bitcoin would decrease, leading ghash miners to have an incentive to leave the pool making it difficult to sustain such an attack.

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on June 24, 2014, 02:38:33 PM

Quote from: seriouscoin on June 24, 2014, 02:05:03 PM

It doesn't matter if the honest nodes don't want to accept anything from the attacker.
The attacker has enough hashrate to change the rules.

How is the attacker (a miner and node(s)) going to force me to change the software (node) on my computer so he can modify the rules of the protocol?

Easy, he can't.

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on June 24, 2014, 02:38:33 PM

Seriously, either I didn't get what a 51% ownership of the network is, or you still don't understand the dangers of it.
Don't know which.

Maybe someone more knowledgeable on the subject can elaborate.......

Have you read the wiki which gives a very simple explanation of what an attacker with a lot of hash power can and can not do?

Have you?

Please stop arguing when you dont understand crap.

Having a longest chain doesnt mean they can change the rules. The rules are set by nodes.

In the event of 51%, there will be a folk of blockchains. The network can react by completely ignore blocks from the attacker (updating client required). This is a complete hard fork. Hence we only see this as disruptive attack. Its still a damage to bitcoin.

Now, since GHash is a pool, the second they do this attack, its clients will move their hashrate else where and GHash will have nothing but shot themself in the foot.

The practicality of this attack is close to nil. There is better way of hurting btc for far less the cost.

CoiledCoin used merged mining similar to Namecoin. LukeJr was able to use Eligius' combined hashing power to execute a 51% attack against the new CoiledCoin blockchain. The Eligius-mined blocks contained no transactions, effectively slowing the function of the Coiledcoin network to a crawl. The same could be done with Bitcoin.

I don't really think Ghash.IO has any intent to do anything but profit from being the largest pool any more than I thought Tycho intended to harm Bitcoin when Deepbit was the front runner. The possibility exists that a government or other entity that wants to harm Bitcoin does not need to invest a fortune in equipment to do damage. They can simply use your equipment to do it. PoW is a flaw that needs to be corrected before Bitcoin exits beta and becomes production software. Many would say Bitcoin is no longer in beta because the market cap says so. If that's true then this problem needs to be solved now before anyone loses any more money to this experiment.

You're missing a key point is that ~~Eligius~~ Bitcoin miners dont mine or care ~~for scamcoins~~ about anything but profit hence ~~Luke~~ Ghash can effectively disrupt the network for a long time (he becomes a single largest miner in the Bitcoin ~~that scamcoin's~~ network).

Another point is the remaining miners ~~scamcoin's participants~~ are not robust enough to effectively ignore Ghash.IO~~Eligius~~. Everyone is in it for pump and dump including many Bitcoiners ( get rich quick scheme)

FIFY

seriouscoin

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Quote from: seriouscoin on June 24, 2014, 02:05:03 PM

It doesn't matter if the honest nodes don't want to accept anything from the attacker.
The attacker has enough hashrate to change the rules.

How is the attacker (a miner and node(s)) going to force me to change the software (node) on my computer so he can modify the rules of the protocol?

Easy, he can't.

Quote from: seriouscoin on June 24, 2014, 02:05:03 PM

Seriously, either I didn't get what a 51% ownership of the network is, or you still don't understand the dangers of it.
Don't know which.

Maybe someone more knowledgeable on the subject can elaborate.......

Have you read the wiki which gives a very simple explanation of what an attacker with a lot of hash power can and can not do?

Have you?

Please stop arguing when you dont understand crap.

Having a longest chain doesnt mean they can change the rules. The rules are set by nodes.

In the event of 51%, there will be a folk of blockchains. The network can react by completely ignore blocks from the attacker (updating client required). This is a complete hard fork. Hence we only see this as disruptive attack. Its still a damage to bitcoin.

Now, since GHash is a pool, the second they do this attack, its clients will move their hashrate else where and GHash will have nothing but shot themself in the foot.

The practicality of this attack is close to nil. There is better way of hurting btc for far less the cost.

CoiledCoin used merged mining similar to Namecoin. LukeJr was able to use Eligius' combined hashing power to execute a 51% attack against the new CoiledCoin blockchain. The Eligius-mined blocks contained no transactions, effectively slowing the function of the Coiledcoin network to a crawl. The same could be done with Bitcoin.

I don't really think Ghash.IO has any intent to do anything but profit from being the largest pool any more than I thought Tycho intended to harm Bitcoin when Deepbit was the front runner. The possibility exists that a government or other entity that wants to harm Bitcoin does not need to invest a fortune in equipment to do damage. They can simply use your equipment to do it. PoW is a flaw that needs to be corrected before Bitcoin exits beta and becomes production software. Many would say Bitcoin is no longer in beta because the market cap says so. If that's true then this problem needs to be solved now before anyone loses any more money to this experiment.

You're missing a key point is that Eligius miners dont mine or care for scamcoins hence Luke can effectively disrupt the network for a long time ( he becomes a single largest miner in that scamcoin's network).

Another point is the scamcoin's participants are not robust enough to effectively ignore Eligius. Everyone is in it for pump and dump ( get rich quick scheme)

Cred

newbie

Activity: 48

Merit: 0

It seems to me that what is required is more pools that are as easy to join and as efficient as GHash. We just need more competition. Once the difference in pool returns is small enough, the incentive for miners to move to a smaller pool to protect BTC overall will overcome the advantages of GHash over any other pool. Basically, BTC Guild and others need to get better. The rest of the community should be subsidizing the underdogs and helping them catch up.

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

It doesn't matter if the honest nodes don't want to accept anything from the attacker.
The attacker has enough hashrate to change the rules.

How is the attacker (a miner and node(s)) going to force me to change the software (node) on my computer so he can modify the rules of the protocol?

Easy, he can't.

Seriously, either I didn't get what a 51% ownership of the network is, or you still don't understand the dangers of it.
Don't know which.

Maybe someone more knowledgeable on the subject can elaborate.......

Have you read the wiki which gives a very simple explanation of what an attacker with a lot of hash power can and can not do?

Have you?

Please stop arguing when you dont understand crap.

Having a longest chain doesnt mean they can change the rules. The rules are set by nodes.

In the event of 51%, there will be a folk of blockchains. The network can react by completely ignore blocks from the attacker (updating client required). This is a complete hard fork. Hence we only see this as disruptive attack. Its still a damage to bitcoin.

Now, since GHash is a pool, the second they do this attack, its clients will move their hashrate else where and GHash will have nothing but shot themself in the foot.

The practicality of this attack is close to nil. There is better way of hurting btc for far less the cost.

CoiledCoin used merged mining similar to Namecoin. LukeJr was able to use Eligius' combined hashing power to execute a 51% attack against the new CoiledCoin blockchain. The Eligius-mined blocks contained no transactions, effectively slowing the function of the Coiledcoin network to a crawl. The same could be done with Bitcoin.

I don't really think Ghash.IO has any intent to do anything but profit from being the largest pool any more than I thought Tycho intended to harm Bitcoin when Deepbit was the front runner. The possibility exists that a government or other entity that wants to harm Bitcoin does not need to invest a fortune in equipment to do damage. They can simply use your equipment to do it. PoW is a flaw that needs to be corrected before Bitcoin exits beta and becomes production software. Many would say Bitcoin is no longer in beta because the market cap says so. If that's true then this problem needs to be solved now before anyone loses any more money to this experiment.

seriouscoin

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

It doesn't matter if the honest nodes don't want to accept anything from the attacker.
The attacker has enough hashrate to change the rules.

How is the attacker (a miner and node(s)) going to force me to change the software (node) on my computer so he can modify the rules of the protocol?

Easy, he can't.