3 ms·
The cost ($80M) is not the interesting metric - consider the press coverage, positive poll results and resulting political engagement. The power gained is the
by rsync 10y ago
The cost ($80M) is not the interesting metric - consider the press coverage, positive poll results and resulting political engagement. The power gained is the interesting result.
Currently there is no power to be gained in wiping out bitcoin when half of the constituents have never even heard of it. Never mind the cost.
- AdamJacobMuller 10y agoAgreed. The point is that USGOV could 100% do it, for pocket change. It would be pocket change for a bunch of countries, really, and expensive but doable for a whole lot more. I would assume the only reason we haven't done it has nothing to do with the cost, its simply that bitcoin is just not interesting enough to them (yet). I can't imagine that some USGOV and probably >1 non-us-gov have plans already and could rapidly build out an ASIC farm, if asked to do so (and funded, of course).
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- ethbro 10y agoChina doing so to halt capital flight is far more likely.
- AdamJacobMuller 10y agoAgreed. China doing it is way more likely in general because they could walk in and take over enough capacity to reduce the capex required for takeover (by combining stolen capacity + new capacity) by perhaps 75%. It would also make it way harder to notice, because a massive new mining pool trying to pull things in a new direction would be obvious. Several established mining ops shifting direction would be less obvious.
- SAI_Peregrinus 10y agoThe NSA has its own fab (IC fabrication plant). That makes rapidly building out an ASIC farm even easier.