i'm talking about the government holding a large number of bitcoins and not doing anything with them. Just mining them and then not using them, not committing any transactions.
For Example: If the U.S. government holds 50% of all bitcoins mined and does nothing with them, how would it affect the bitcoin market? And, not just now, but 5 years from now.
Since BC is infinitely divisible, I'd assume that very little would happen until these Govs "flooded" the market with them.
If 1 million BC exist...but, only 500K ever get used. Them, products and services would be valued based upon the 'scarcity' of the availability.
So, the 500K would be divided into tiny pieces and whenever the other 500K hit the market, valuations would change (kinda like inflation). What I once got for .001 BC may take .1 BC now.
But, I am really behind on this. So, I could be barking mad
The price for all other bitcoins would go up.
Wiki, if someone (organized governments) created a majority of the number of nodes mining, could they disrupt the validation of the bitchain?
Seems like you discussed something about majority control, either of coins or mining nodes but I can't recall. I know it is unlikely, but what would the result be?
Attacker has a lot of computing power
An attacker that controls more than 50% of the network's computing power can, for the time that he is in control, exclude and modify the ordering of transactions. This allows him to:
Reverse transactions that he sends while he's in control. This has the potential to double-spend transactions that previously had already been seen in the block chain.
Prevent some or all transactions from gaining any confirmations
Prevent some or all other miners from mining any valid blocks
The attacker can't:
Reverse other people's transactions
Prevent transactions from being sent at all (they'll show as 0/unconfirmed)
Change the number of coins generated per block
Create coins out of thin air
Send coins that never belonged to him
With less than 50%, the same kind of attacks are possible, but with less than 100% rate of success. For example, someone with only 40% of the network computing power can overcome a 6-deep confirmed transaction with a 50% success rate.
It's much more difficult to change historical blocks, and it becomes exponentially more difficult the further back you go. As above, changing historical blocks only allows you to exclude and change the ordering of transactions. It's impossible to change blocks created before the last checkpoint.
Since this attack doesn't permit all that much power over the network, it is expected that no one will attempt it. A profit-seeking person will always gain more by just following the rules, and even someone trying to destroy the system will probably find other attacks more attractive. However, if this attack is successfully executed, it will be difficult or impossible to "untangle" the mess created -- any changes the attacker makes might become permanent.
I have Tulips for sale
Wiki, I was under the impression that in its current implementation bitcoin is limited to representing only eight decimal places which would make it finite. Is this not correct?
But wouldn't it be possible for an attacker to cause the total bitcoin network computing power to be reduced to a more attackable level by interrupting communications, thus making it easier for a 51% attack to succeed?
Wiki, do you really think that a group such as the Fed which has nearly unlimited resources, couldnt buy up a massive amount of bitcoins...driving the price bubble to an insane proportion...then pop it in one move?