3 ms·
From the report, > Even though these Nakamoto coefficients are relatively low, some might argue that exploiting them to attack a blockchain would be prohibitiv
by frabert 4y ago
From the report,
> Even though these Nakamoto coefficients are relatively low, some might argue that exploiting them to attack a blockchain would be prohibitively expensive. While this may be true for individuals, the actors incentivized to perpetrate these attacks include operators of competing currencies and nation-states who have the requisite resources. Perverse incentives can exist with blockchains in the same way that the relative values of fiat currencies can be manipulated.
- mypastself 4y agoCompeting currencies are unlikely to profit from Bitcoin’s downfall in this scenario, given how much the entire space relies on its reputation. Nation-states, on the other hand, are the more credible threat. Just because none of them has yet found it a big enough threat to expend the required resources, doesn’t mean it can’t happen. I feel like the more Bitcoin is used for its original intended purpose rather than merely speculation, the more likely it is to be attacked by such actors.
- bhaak 4y agoI think it's more complex than the report poses it. It's not as if those mentioned entities always have complete control over their mining hardware as those entities include pool miners. I think there's more that prevents an attack than just being "prohibitively expensive".