- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Bitcoin faces biggest threat yet: a miner takeover
Posted on 6/17/14 at 5:29 pm to joshnorris14
Posted on 6/17/14 at 5:29 pm to joshnorris14
josh, stop. You're making a fool out of yourself. Again.
But you probably enjoy doing that because you view yourself as a perpetual victim. That's why you're always paranoid about everything.
A government, or governments working together, could easily disable the vast majority of the computing power of networks just by shutting down the communications infrastructure temporarily and then impose their own resources to easily exceed the necessary 50%+ threshold to takeover the BTC hashing.
It could be done in a matter of hours. And then the entire protocol would be compromised. Permanently.
If you try to say it couldn't be done, you're just being stupid.
But you probably enjoy doing that because you view yourself as a perpetual victim. That's why you're always paranoid about everything.
A government, or governments working together, could easily disable the vast majority of the computing power of networks just by shutting down the communications infrastructure temporarily and then impose their own resources to easily exceed the necessary 50%+ threshold to takeover the BTC hashing.
It could be done in a matter of hours. And then the entire protocol would be compromised. Permanently.
If you try to say it couldn't be done, you're just being stupid.
1
Posted on 6/17/14 at 5:42 pm to LSURussian
Yea, someone is making a fool out of themselves, if they do that, the network will simply fork to the previous state prior to the communication shutdown.
If the communications between the nodes is disrupted they will only be compromising the bitcoin network until the communications between the nodes is rejoined. Once they see what happened when they were offline they can say "holy shite, we should really go back to block X and start working off of that chain.". Do you know what BLOCK CHAIN means?
Why do you continue to try to opine on this topic instead of educating yourself?
If the communications between the nodes is disrupted they will only be compromising the bitcoin network until the communications between the nodes is rejoined. Once they see what happened when they were offline they can say "holy shite, we should really go back to block X and start working off of that chain.". Do you know what BLOCK CHAIN means?
Why do you continue to try to opine on this topic instead of educating yourself?
Posted on 6/17/14 at 5:43 pm to joshnorris14
quote:I doubt the smartest cryptographers in the world are focusing their efforts on Bitcoins, or any other cryptocurrency.
The smartest cryptographers in the world are working on this, do you seriously doubt them?
Please explain to those of us who do not believe the technology will permit people with limited computational power to compete equally with larger operations. Is it more efficient to have 1 internet connection for 100 units of massed computational power, or 100 internet connections for 100 independent units of computational power? Same for the energy costs to operate the computers.
Bitcoin mining is not a cooperative endeavor. It is a competitive endeavor. There are winners and losers. Advances in cryptography will never eliminate the competitive nature of mining. There will still be winners and losers, and economies of scale will play a key role in determining who wins and who loses.
Posted on 6/17/14 at 5:52 pm to Poodlebrain
quote:
I doubt the smartest cryptographers in the world are focusing their efforts on Bitcoins, or any other cryptocurrency.
Unless you consider Ralph Merkle an average cryptographer, you'd be wrong.
quote:
Bitcoin mining is not a cooperative endeavor. It is a competitive endeavor. There are winners and losers. Advances in cryptography will never eliminate the competitive nature of mining. There will still be winners and losers, and economies of scale will play a key role in determining who wins and who loses.
I really wish you would seek to understand instead of seek to dismiss. As I just told you, it's being worked on in a concept Peter Todd describes as "tree chains" where verification of transactions is done by everyone running any kind of node (including SPV clients). This would remove the possibility of a 51% attack while decentralizing the distribution of bitcoin core nodes.
And there are many others working on different problems that will evolve blockchain technology. Greg Maxwell and Adam Back have figured out a way to two-way peg cryptocurrencies which will all but eliminate alt-coins and allow for rapid testing and development in bitcoin. Tree chains gained popularity as a critique over the necessary centralization of bitcoin core nodes that would arise if side chains were implemented into the protocol.
This post was edited on 6/17/14 at 5:54 pm
Posted on 6/17/14 at 7:32 pm to joshnorris14
And btc would be compromised and dead.
Posted on 6/17/14 at 8:43 pm to joshnorris14
quote:Have you looked in the mirror? Bitcoin mining is an activity people engage in to create wealth for themselves. Thus, mining is an economic activity. Let me repeat that for slow learners, BITCOIN MINING IS AN ECONOMIC ACTIVITY. As such, you can't pretend that economic advantages like economies of scale won't play a key role in determining who succeeds at mining.
I really wish you would seek to understand instead of seek to dismiss.
Just one final question for you, is this the Tech Board or the Money Board? Ignoring economics on the Money Board will not win many arguments.
Posted on 6/17/14 at 9:42 pm to Poodlebrain
He doesn't troll to win, he trolls for sport. 
And he's got ya. Hook, line and sinker.
FTW I have no opinion on bitcoins.
And he's got ya. Hook, line and sinker.
FTW I have no opinion on bitcoins.
Posted on 6/18/14 at 7:08 am to Poodlebrain
Are you just glossing over what I'm saying?
Posted on 6/18/14 at 7:52 am to joshnorris14
quote:
Are you just glossing over what I'm saying?
I think what you fail to grasp is that you keep dismissing what everyone else keeps saying. You fail to understand the economic side of it and have such a hard on for the technology that you can't see the forest for the trees.
Posted on 6/18/14 at 9:01 am to LSURussian
I posted this on the MSB but I'll post it here too. Bitcoin is said to be sponsoring the former Beef O'Brady's Bowl held in St. Petersburg. Its not totally relevant but I figured Josh would get a 3/4 chub from it haha Although sponsoring the St. Petersburg Bowl is hardly an accomplishment.
LINK
LINK
Posted on 6/18/14 at 9:14 am to htownjeep
What first intrigued me about bitcoin was the economics.
And what he is stating I am fully understanding and his point isn't that wrong which is why people like Peter Todd are developing ideas like Tree Chains which is what I'm trying to get across.
And what he is stating I am fully understanding and his point isn't that wrong which is why people like Peter Todd are developing ideas like Tree Chains which is what I'm trying to get across.
Posted on 6/18/14 at 9:18 am to joshnorris14
Then explain Tree Chain in your own words. How will Tree Chains make Bitcoin mainstream?
This is my major issue with you Josh. You never have an original thought on the matter. You quote other people.
You often say "we" do not understand the technology, yet you always fail to put it in your "own" words.
As someone who researches Bitcoin as much as you, you cannot put together a coherent statement on the topic. You confuse topics and revert to outside sources for discussion. How on earth can this be the future when years of study on Bitcoin still leaves an advanced user like yourself confused?
Step up to the plate boy.
This is my major issue with you Josh. You never have an original thought on the matter. You quote other people.
You often say "we" do not understand the technology, yet you always fail to put it in your "own" words.
As someone who researches Bitcoin as much as you, you cannot put together a coherent statement on the topic. You confuse topics and revert to outside sources for discussion. How on earth can this be the future when years of study on Bitcoin still leaves an advanced user like yourself confused?
Step up to the plate boy.
This post was edited on 6/18/14 at 9:27 am
Posted on 6/18/14 at 9:26 am to joshnorris14
LINK
I can't believe people associated with bitcoins would be dishonest. No way!!!
quote:
Two Researchers Think ‘Armageddon’ Is Nigh for Bitcoin
Bitcoin’s integrity is being threatened in a massive way — but not by a government attack, in this case, but rather by the very people who make bitcoin happen.
While the pair acknowledges the possibility of a “51 percenter” remaining honest, they stress the point that having to depend on honesty undermines a key component of what made bitcoin attractive in the first place — and they note that GHash has been implicated in shady “double-spend” activities before.
I can't believe people associated with bitcoins would be dishonest. No way!!!
Posted on 6/18/14 at 9:34 am to joshnorris14
quote:How will tree chains alter the advantages of economies of scale among miners? You have not provided an explanation of how this will be accomplished, nor have you provided a link to a source that provides an explanation. Tree chains may alter how people compete to mine Bitcoins, or whatever successor takes its place, but they do not eliminate the rewards of getting there first. As long as there are economic benefits to mining there will be competition, and competitors with advantages of economies of scale will be more successful. Their success will force out competition making control of 51% of the computing power more likely.
And what he is stating I am fully understanding and his point isn't that wrong which is why people like Peter Todd are developing ideas like Tree Chains which is what I'm trying to get across.
Posted on 6/18/14 at 10:02 am to Poodlebrain
Because it will change the transaction verification mechanism from mining to anyone running any kind of node (including SPV). They would be verifying not the entire block, but Merkle tree chains of transactions in the block.
And to the person who asked how this would make bitcoin mainstream, this concept doesn't seek to make bitcoin mainstream, it seeks to solve the problem of node centralization brought about by increased block sizes or merge mining proposed side chains.
And to the person who asked how this would make bitcoin mainstream, this concept doesn't seek to make bitcoin mainstream, it seeks to solve the problem of node centralization brought about by increased block sizes or merge mining proposed side chains.
Posted on 6/18/14 at 10:24 am to joshnorris14
Why will people want to verify transactions unless their is reward for doing so? It there is reward, then the most efficient miners will get the most rewards. How do you disassociate economies of scale from efficiency in mining operations? The competition will change from the entire block to Merkle tree chains, but there will still be competition.
BTW, my father used to work with Merkle's father at what is now Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. They were physicists who spent the majority of their careers working on classified projects. They were typical of the scientists that government has working for it. The government has similarly qualified people working on cryptologic projects who are among the best in the field.
BTW, my father used to work with Merkle's father at what is now Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. They were physicists who spent the majority of their careers working on classified projects. They were typical of the scientists that government has working for it. The government has similarly qualified people working on cryptologic projects who are among the best in the field.
Posted on 6/18/14 at 10:38 am to mkibod1
quote:
Bitcoin is said to be sponsoring the former Beef O'Brady's Bowl
Bitpay, not bitcoin. Bitpay is a corporate entity, bitcoin is not.
Posted on 6/18/14 at 11:09 am to foshizzle
I love bitcoin threads
Posted on 6/18/14 at 11:24 am to Poodlebrain
Anyone running a full node right now verifies transactions they just don't broadcast their verification to the network. Under Peter Todd's concept anyone with any kind of bitcoin wallet will do it automatically.
Posted on 6/18/14 at 1:02 pm to joshnorris14
quote:
Under Peter Todd's concept anyone with any kind of bitcoin wallet will do it automatically.
Why?
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News