5 ms·
>Bitcoin cannot survive a majority attack. This is true bitcoin cannot survive a majority attack. But the amount of resources needed to form a majority attack
by kneel 10y ago
>Bitcoin cannot survive a majority attack.
This is true bitcoin cannot survive a majority attack. But the amount of resources needed to form a majority attack would be better used to just mine bitcoin.
Attacking the network for the sake of attacking it would be very expensive and would basically devalue BTC, which I'm assuming would remove any initial incentive.
- FooBarWidget 10y agoIn theory. Who said an attack would happen by allocating computing resources? That strikes me as https://xkcd.com/538/ https://xkcd.com/538/. Suppose that the majority of the miners are allied with a small number of organizations. People/organizations with sufficient influence can strike deals with those organizations to orchestrate a majority attack.
- zeven7 10y ago> Who said an attack would happen by allocating computing resources? > Suppose that the majority of miners Doesn't the "majority of miners" being in on it mean the same thing as "allocating computing resources"?
- FooBarWidget 10y agoI suppose that's a matter of definition. I read "allocating computing resources" as "building/buying more hardware". That should indeed be unfeasible. But using social means to gather support from other people who have already allocated computing resources should be a lot more feasible.
- zeven7 10y agoYeah, a lot more feasible but not less suicidal. The idea is that if miners were to band together to abuse their power and rig the system, the larger population would lose faith in Bitcoin's ability to accurately serve as an accounting mechanism, no longer value it, and Bitcoins would be worthless. Now the money the miners stole is worthless and their equipment is worthless. So it's suicidal for them to try to rig the system. They can't gain from it.