Just to restate because I was not expecting to have to have this post pop up to top of thread: The selfish mining paper shows a significantly worse result than

Just to restate because I was not expecting to have to have this post pop up to top of thread: The selfish mining paper shows a significantly worse result than 1/3. I feel the need to lay this out very plainly because folks may not be in on that joke. It's a joke at 1/3rd because that's sort of a naive threshold of for the BGP anyways. Bitcoin was supposed to provide a stable solution where distributed actors could come to consensus on a ledger. That's how it was sold in the original paper. Majority attacks against the system will always exist, but the paper mentioned proves that the Bitcoin proof of work algorithm is much worse than we realized, and (more troublingly) that bad actors are harder to detect than it was passively assumed.