4 ms·
Certainly not impossible, but one thing is a disincentive to commit a 51% attack is that if you had that much computing power a more profitable use of it would
by jjxw 9y ago
Certainly not impossible, but one thing is a disincentive to commit a 51% attack is that if you had that much computing power a more profitable use of it would be to just mine rather than create fake transactions which, if detected, could crash the value of the currency.
- Florin_Andrei 9y ago> if detected How people think of that hypothetical if-then scenario depends a lot on numerous factors. I think, in places where corruption is more common, it is easier to believe it's less likely you'll get caught, or minimize the consequences when thinking about it. There's also a lower threshold for your imagination to go wandering off in that direction and begin architecting plans. "If detected, could crash the whole thing" is a way of thinking more common in cultures where the rule of law is far more established in the common mindset. I'm not making any sort of prediction (and I own bitcoin myself, though not a large amount). I'm just saying - this is how our minds work.
- politician 9y ago> a disincentive to commit a 51% attack... Consider that if a state goal was to wipe out the wealth of the other 49% as a plausibly deniable economic attack, then having a majority of the mining power within your borders makes a lot of sense.