Topic: Wanted: Mining pool to take out alt block chains - page 2. (Read 4955 times)

Many things has been violeted even in bitcoin history. I strongly suggest you to become more familiar with the concept of cryptochains not crypto economics. Cause you mess that up. No rule was violeted with a simple dominance of more then 51%, that was simply not gentlemen like, but there was no demage caused on the chain from a cryptochain perspective, exept the economic and the image demage. To dominate a chain is not a violation per se.

Merged mining is benefical for all chains, since it supports the diversification of hashing, p2pool is the best example for that, if you dont wanna trust then trust at least yourself, and run your own mining node.

When you donate your hashpower to a pool then well you have to trust the pool operator, only the operator is capable to do a 51% attack these days. its not the single miner

Hope you understand now that not the miner is the potential danger, its the pool operator. Merged mining is not the problem a single operator with enough hash power is the thread, thats why p2pool is so great on transparency and decentralization. But a single pool with enogh hash power is a potential thread to all cryptochains not just the alts.

Decentralization of hashpower and merged mining avoids the need of "gentlemen agreements"

You are operating under the assumption that the currencies are not competing. Or alternatively, that they are competing, but there are certain gentlemens' rules that miners will not violate. Those seem like very bad assumptions to me. These rules have been violated in the past. They will be violated in the future.

This is a largly part of propaganda, in fact merged mining protects the alt chains. There was one singe dominance of a small young chain, that wasnt yet known to the merged miners. It only was possible to attack that chain cause of the low amount of merged mining and solo mining pools what was mining for that chain.

Merged mining keeps the chains secure, and not only the exchanges will be gratefull for the additional security!

anything else is missinformation

I thought merged mining had facilitated 51% attacks on chains that permitted it? It doesn't seem like a good idea in theory either.

There is no reason not to do merged mining! Cause you usualy get more!

I didn't know what merged mining was until I went to the bitparking site lol, thanks for your post. Is there any reason for a miner to NOT do merged mining? Do you normally get less BTC than just using a normal pool?

I doubt VERY much that anyone is seriously considering attacking Devcoin as the developers are the backbone, blood, guts and organs of this community, but I do agree with your last paragraph, mining pools could really help solve the problems of security issues by increasing the network hashrates of the alt-chains by offering more merged mining.

Right now BitParking seems to be doing the best in that area offering merged mining of BTC, NMC, IXC and DVC (they were supporting merged mining of I0C as well up until a few days ago).

But BitParking can't support all of the alt-chains alone, there's simply just not enough hashing power there. I think ALL of the exchanges should strive to offer merged mining in as many coins as possible as it will bring more users to their pools and it will bring more hasing power to the alt-chains which can greatly help to protect all of the chains from >51% double-spend attacks.

Guys, OP is a troll.
-"Oh hi, I don't like alt-coins and I'm looking for a guy who took the hassle of making a whole pool for me, so I can click a shiny red button that destroy alt-chains".

Don't take him seriously.

The Growing list of crypto developers sponsored by Devcoin an altchain. So please support us, we develop for you, we keep cryptochains going. https://raw.github.com/Unthinkingbit/charity/master/bitcoinshare.html

Besides that the Altchain Namecoin is backing us all up! In case of a DNS shutdown, there would be still domains with .bit ending working.

Alt chains are varous configurations of the mother chain invented by satoshi nakamoto. By now we had only the time to experiment since 2009 with the unique concept satoshi made the world familiar with. We aproach just in these days the first big mark for BTC, we are still not 1.0 Version.

Some chains run faster, then BTC some has more some less units to give to the miner, what ever there configuration is, the financial power (market capitalisation) is not the main viewpoint from a developers perspective, security and stability is. Various aspects of the system as we use it with BTC are only uncovered and can be tested with alternatively build chains.

We would never know certain things for the benefit of BTC without the alts.

Diversification is the key to security

To kill alt chains is like to kill your imunesystem, how long would you survive in a hostile enviroment like the world actualy is without it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OztVYTS_Ei8

+1

Thats not for all alt chains the case, in fact Devcoin is in a legalization process caused by devda.ch. Direct exchange for fiat (swiss bank transfer, sipa, phys. gold and silver etc) is planned for 1. quarter 2013. This means legal cover of a swiss cooperative for devcoin, but means aswell that atacking alt chains is not just a game anymore -  In fact it is a hostile act. Since devda.ch builds on a alt chain, to atack alt chains will be prosecuted by the swiss legal authorities, since it is the equivalent of a atacking the infrastructure of a swiss legal institution. For the atack on a blockchain are two steps needed:

1. You need to dominate the total hashrate of a chain by more then 51%
2. Then You have to follow a certain value transfer pattern, that is causing fraudulent transactions

Just to gain the dominance over a chain, doesnt mean that you attack a chain, or automaticaly do fraudulent transactions. It is not possible to kill a chain as long there is hashingpower. But yes, how you can know when you never dominated a chain.

To say that alt chains are dangerous for btc is simply a expression of not understanding as it is to say to atack an chain is simply done by just dominating it.

Besides all that such activity is disrespectfull to the developers!! It was the opensource developers that brought you not only FPGA early this year as first (no it wasnt BFL) and they now are about to bring you ASIC. So many wonderfull developments was made.. and Bitcoin did strongly profit from that activity as you can see on the actual exchange and hash rate. I remember when BTC was worth like 2 USD a year ago, then FPGA started to rise. Prior to the activity for example there was far less hashpower to secure the btc infrastructure, today we more then doubled the hashspeed. Guys dnt you realy remember wasnt bitcoin 2011 aswell called dead ??

Devcoin is the chain of the Developers, its build protected by cryptochain hardware and software developers (yes BTC developers too), and im sure we will hold against the atacking or even destroying of alt chains. One World one Chain is not the way i see cryptochains working, diversification is the key to stability of crypto.

But this hostile thinking and activity shows me one thing, there could be far more hashpower donated to the altchains. Pool operators why dnt you do something for your miners like offering them merged mining benefit ?? Instead of atacking, you could protect and profit! Attacking a cryptochain is waste of power, and in the long run just expensive and legaly dangerous for the attackers and the pool.

yeah this makes sense to me to and is a nice explanation

Thats the best explanation why we should leave the Alt-chains in peace I've heard so far. It's really true. Killing the alt-chains is the equivalent of kicking all the lower-hash rate miners out of the crypto world. And those lower-hash rate miners are important for the economy.

Step 1. Create special miner for said mining pool to take out alt chains
Step 2. Add trojan to step 1
Step 3. Send all of OPs bitcoins to yourself
Step 4.
Step 5. Profit

+1 Makes perfect sense

If bitcoin cant survive because of alt coins...then it doesnt deserve too. Same with any alt coin.

Yeah, you're right, i guess it's because i won't necessarily first prevent other from mining, if i were attacking...

Anyway ... the "tiny, micro, small" pool i've been mining on from time to time found two blocks in the last 24 hours, but .. currently, that pool hashing power is really low, less than 500 M hashes /s not unusual then...

i'll wait and see if another one is finally found by this one

LOL!!!

"Alt-coins are a threat to bitcoin!!! FUD!!! FUD!!! FUD!!!"

Go to any exchange, bitcoin is still king. It's not necessary to kill the alt-chains in order to preserve the future of bitcoin.

In fact, kill the alt-chains and you're only hurting yourself AND bitcoin because right now there are people with hashrates that are entirely USELESS for hashing bitcoin, these people are hashing on alt-coins while simultaneously feeding the market with more demand for BTC because when they go to sell those alt-coins they are selling for BTC thus increasing the demand for BTC without also increasing the supply of BTC which makes BTC more valuable.

Kill those alt-chains and you kill a LARGE percentage of the BTC market because now all of those low hash-rate miners (who are the VAST majority of any given coin's hashing network as well as the VAST majority of people using the exchanges trying to sell off their alt-coins to get their hands on the more coveted bitcoin) will pretty much immediately lose all interest in bitcoin and any/all derivatives of bitcoin because there is no longer a way for them to participate and turn a profit.

Kill the alt-chains and you kill bitcoin as well.

There is no reason why a 51% attack needs to affect txns. It can just monopolize mining and have no other impact on end-users. (i.e. unapproved miners get their blocks rejected. other than that everything is normal)

i'm still able to send 'old' TRC coins, and see them included in later blocks.

Any chance you can extract the full reject reason from your log file ? (the client log, if you were solo-mining) ; could be some time-sync issue, or your local client/daemin just "saw" the new block too late.
(looks like cgminer output)