6 ms·

If more countries ban crypto mining we can successfully perform a 51% attack and destroy the value of Bitcoin, which should eradicate this useless and wasteful

If more countries ban crypto mining we can successfully perform a 51% attack and destroy the value of Bitcoin, which should eradicate this useless and wasteful technology forever. Hopefully more countries follow suit and the attack can begin.

exdsq 5y ago
I can't imagine disliking a technology so much I put it as my username and spend my free time writing about how much I hate it on tech forums
- rasengan 5y ago
  There is a concerted effort going on here.
  - sudosysgen 5y ago
    No. A lot of people just passionately hate bitcoin, for rational reasons. It's not concerted. The government isn't sending people to HN to dissuade you from buying Bitcoin. If the powers that be wanted to shut down bitcoin, all they'd have to do is come together, agree to seize all mining equipment, and do a 51% attack together to fill the Blockchain with trash. Maybe also run some stings on BTC exchanges. They don't need to convince you not to use it.
    - exdsq 5y ago
      "All they'd have to do is come together, agree to seize all mining equipment, and do a 51% attack together" Think this through for a bit. Governments have holdings in bitcoin. Financial institutions have holdings in bitcoin. Citizens have significant percentages of their savings in bitcoin. Bitcoin is available in various financial instruments now, so this would have knock-on effects in the wider market. A large percentage of crypto hash rate is from unknown parties or distributed on regular computers/phones/botnets, so the governments would have to invest money into mining equipment to run this 51% attack that would end up being totally dead money after the attack. You'd have lobbying from huge money sources to stop this happening. You'd have governments looking to take advantage of this. You'd be trying to destroy the legal tender of some countries which I believe is illegal under international law. By increasing the hash rate you'd be increasing the price of the coin and incentivizing people to defend against it. And, if it all happened, people could do what happened to Ethereum and simply fork Bitcoin from the point of the attack. No more mining equipment? Run PoS.
      - CaptainZapp 5y ago
        > Governments have holdings in bitcoin What governments have holdings in bitcoin? If you refer to El Salvador I don't think that this is a shining example. If you're referring to failed states, like Venezuela, I'd like to see a source for your assessment. Having as much funds as possible in hard currency is much more important for such countries. That's why I don't buy it. > Financial institutions have holdings in bitcoin I'm working in finance and argue that they don't hold funds in bitcoin. At least not their own funds. Sure, they're looking into crypto and blockchain. They could miss on the next big thing (yet to materialize). But I've yet to see a marketable offering, or a useful solution based on the technology by any reputable financial institution. If you know of an established bank (I rule out crypto exchanges in any form), which invests in crypto I'm interested in who this may be.
      - sudosysgen 5y ago
        Bitcoin is not the sovereign currency of any country, so there is no issues as far as international law. Sure, lobbying is an issue, but if the government is lobbied to support crypto, they support crypto. I'm starting from the assumption that they see it as an existential threat and want to eradicate it. When I say "governments", I mean the likes if China, the US, and some key states of the EU. Really not that many.
        djbebs 5y ago
        Did you miss the part where El Salvador made it one of its official currencies?
        CaptainZapp 5y ago
        It doesn't really look like a roaring success as of now.
        sudosysgen 5y ago
        Official currency != Sovereign currency. El Salvador also had the US dollar as an official currency, does that mean they get to sue you if you destroy US dollars or devalue the currency (as the US can do)? Of course not, because while it's a currency the Salvadoran government agrees to accept, it's not actually their sovereign currency.
- IMTDb 5y ago
  When that technology becomes a non-trivial part of the global CO2 emission without bringing any value for anyone except select few "investors", it becomes an issue. Completely shutting down all cryptos would have the following effects: - Immediately reducing electricity consumption worldwide - Making money transfer for illegal activities (drug, human trafficking, prostitution, gambling, ...) harder - Making money laundering of said activities harder - Reducing the electronic chip shortage - Forcing a bunch of young, adventurous, often quite clever people to find another source of revenues. Hopefully by providing some tangible value to society It sound like a good plan. The only real I see are for people using cryptos in authoritative regimes, so overall a net benefit for the world.
HatchedLake721 5y ago
Found Mojo Jojo
marvelmarvel 5y ago
Is there a less interesting place to discuss crypto than HN?
jmakov 5y ago
In my country they closed a bank account of a dude that was critical to a politician. And the bank acc of his wife. Central EU, "developed world". They can't do this wit your private crypto wallet.
- dgellow 5y ago
  Which country?
  - sudosysgen 5y ago
    Probably Bulgaria, Romania, or Poland.
  - jmakov 5y ago
    Used to be Slovenia. Now more Slovenian democratic repulic. Democratic in the name so you know democracy works...
- secondcoming 5y ago
  What's to stop miners, or exchanges, agreeing to blacklist certain wallet addresses?
  - rini17 5y ago
    That it won't work even for fiat? Of course there are some blacklists against certain prominent persons but the vast majority of dirty money goes around unfettered.
- paxys 5y ago
  The problem in this case is the government not the banking technology. Do you really think if there are armed police at your house to intimidate you you are safe because there's a crypto wallet on your phone?
  - fragmede 5y ago
    https://xkcd.com/538/ https://xkcd.com/538/
finite_jest 5y ago
> Also, single-purpose accounts are not allowed here generally, because they aren't compatible with the value of curiosity that's supposed to animate this place (see https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html). [1] [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29692666 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29692666
- throwawaygh 5y ago
  I'm not sure that "discussing crypto" should count as single-purpose. Otherwise many of the more interesting people who post on hn are almost certainly single-purpose posters (on whatever their pet topic/project/area of expertise happens to be). In any case, I found the above post compelling. What if critics of crypto pooled resources and waited for a major crisis, and then launched a 51% attack at just the right moment? It's an interesting thing to think about.
  - ChainOfFools 5y ago
    if ever the threat of a sustained and deeply-buried 51% attack actually appeared, the core devs, effectively meaning Adam Back, would just find an excuse to fork away by declaring the exploited fork uncanonical (in so many words). The mob of laser-eye HODLbugs will fall right in line and go on full social media attack against anyone supporting the old chain. All will all vehemently deny any ensuing comparison to ETH vs ETH classic.
- theknocker 5y ago
pcdoodle 5y ago
Go lick a boot.

exdsq 5y ago

I can't imagine disliking a technology so much I put it as my username and spend my free time writing about how much I hate it on tech forums

rasengan 5y ago
There is a concerted effort going on here.
- sudosysgen 5y ago
  No. A lot of people just passionately hate bitcoin, for rational reasons. It's not concerted. The government isn't sending people to HN to dissuade you from buying Bitcoin. If the powers that be wanted to shut down bitcoin, all they'd have to do is come together, agree to seize all mining equipment, and do a 51% attack together to fill the Blockchain with trash. Maybe also run some stings on BTC exchanges. They don't need to convince you not to use it.
  - exdsq 5y ago
    "All they'd have to do is come together, agree to seize all mining equipment, and do a 51% attack together" Think this through for a bit. Governments have holdings in bitcoin. Financial institutions have holdings in bitcoin. Citizens have significant percentages of their savings in bitcoin. Bitcoin is available in various financial instruments now, so this would have knock-on effects in the wider market. A large percentage of crypto hash rate is from unknown parties or distributed on regular computers/phones/botnets, so the governments would have to invest money into mining equipment to run this 51% attack that would end up being totally dead money after the attack. You'd have lobbying from huge money sources to stop this happening. You'd have governments looking to take advantage of this. You'd be trying to destroy the legal tender of some countries which I believe is illegal under international law. By increasing the hash rate you'd be increasing the price of the coin and incentivizing people to defend against it. And, if it all happened, people could do what happened to Ethereum and simply fork Bitcoin from the point of the attack. No more mining equipment? Run PoS.
    - CaptainZapp 5y ago
      > Governments have holdings in bitcoin What governments have holdings in bitcoin? If you refer to El Salvador I don't think that this is a shining example. If you're referring to failed states, like Venezuela, I'd like to see a source for your assessment. Having as much funds as possible in hard currency is much more important for such countries. That's why I don't buy it. > Financial institutions have holdings in bitcoin I'm working in finance and argue that they don't hold funds in bitcoin. At least not their own funds. Sure, they're looking into crypto and blockchain. They could miss on the next big thing (yet to materialize). But I've yet to see a marketable offering, or a useful solution based on the technology by any reputable financial institution. If you know of an established bank (I rule out crypto exchanges in any form), which invests in crypto I'm interested in who this may be.
    - sudosysgen 5y ago
      Bitcoin is not the sovereign currency of any country, so there is no issues as far as international law. Sure, lobbying is an issue, but if the government is lobbied to support crypto, they support crypto. I'm starting from the assumption that they see it as an existential threat and want to eradicate it. When I say "governments", I mean the likes if China, the US, and some key states of the EU. Really not that many.
      - djbebs 5y ago
        Did you miss the part where El Salvador made it one of its official currencies?
        CaptainZapp 5y ago
        It doesn't really look like a roaring success as of now.
        sudosysgen 5y ago
        Official currency != Sovereign currency. El Salvador also had the US dollar as an official currency, does that mean they get to sue you if you destroy US dollars or devalue the currency (as the US can do)? Of course not, because while it's a currency the Salvadoran government agrees to accept, it's not actually their sovereign currency.
IMTDb 5y ago
When that technology becomes a non-trivial part of the global CO2 emission without bringing any value for anyone except select few "investors", it becomes an issue. Completely shutting down all cryptos would have the following effects: - Immediately reducing electricity consumption worldwide - Making money transfer for illegal activities (drug, human trafficking, prostitution, gambling, ...) harder - Making money laundering of said activities harder - Reducing the electronic chip shortage - Forcing a bunch of young, adventurous, often quite clever people to find another source of revenues. Hopefully by providing some tangible value to society It sound like a good plan. The only real I see are for people using cryptos in authoritative regimes, so overall a net benefit for the world.

HatchedLake721 5y ago

Found Mojo Jojo

marvelmarvel 5y ago

Is there a less interesting place to discuss crypto than HN?

jmakov 5y ago

In my country they closed a bank account of a dude that was critical to a politician. And the bank acc of his wife. Central EU, "developed world". They can't do this wit your private crypto wallet.

dgellow 5y ago
Which country?
- sudosysgen 5y ago
  Probably Bulgaria, Romania, or Poland.
- jmakov 5y ago
  Used to be Slovenia. Now more Slovenian democratic repulic. Democratic in the name so you know democracy works...
secondcoming 5y ago
What's to stop miners, or exchanges, agreeing to blacklist certain wallet addresses?
- rini17 5y ago
  That it won't work even for fiat? Of course there are some blacklists against certain prominent persons but the vast majority of dirty money goes around unfettered.
paxys 5y ago
The problem in this case is the government not the banking technology. Do you really think if there are armed police at your house to intimidate you you are safe because there's a crypto wallet on your phone?
- fragmede 5y ago
  https://xkcd.com/538/ https://xkcd.com/538/

finite_jest 5y ago

> Also, single-purpose accounts are not allowed here generally, because they aren't compatible with the value of curiosity that's supposed to animate this place (see https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html). [1] [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29692666 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29692666

throwawaygh 5y ago
I'm not sure that "discussing crypto" should count as single-purpose. Otherwise many of the more interesting people who post on hn are almost certainly single-purpose posters (on whatever their pet topic/project/area of expertise happens to be). In any case, I found the above post compelling. What if critics of crypto pooled resources and waited for a major crisis, and then launched a 51% attack at just the right moment? It's an interesting thing to think about.
- ChainOfFools 5y ago
  if ever the threat of a sustained and deeply-buried 51% attack actually appeared, the core devs, effectively meaning Adam Back, would just find an excuse to fork away by declaring the exploited fork uncanonical (in so many words). The mob of laser-eye HODLbugs will fall right in line and go on full social media attack against anyone supporting the old chain. All will all vehemently deny any ensuing comparison to ETH vs ETH classic.
theknocker 5y ago

pcdoodle 5y ago

Go lick a boot.