4 ms·
That does not sound right, bitcoin fraction alone should be more than 3%. Maybe GPU mining market value as bitcoin is dominated by ASICs.
by TrainedMonkey 4y ago
That does not sound right, bitcoin fraction alone should be more than 3%. Maybe GPU mining market value as bitcoin is dominated by ASICs.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- remram 4y agoIf only 3% of hardware owned by miners and dedicated to mining is put towards Bitcoin, doesn't that make it super-likely that a 50% attack will happen any day? Bitcoin is still "mainstream" (within crypto) and easy to trade so a double-spend could be very lucrative? The whole security of proof-of-work depends on "you can't beat the network", but when such a small fraction of available hardware is left in that particular network, what security does it have?
- bitxbitxbitcoin 4y agoWhat you're missing is: 1) newer generations of bitcoin mining hardware are orders of magnitude more efficient so 3% of hardware isn't 3% of total SHA 256 computational capacity 2) 3% of hardware owned by miners is probably a GPU number. Eth is mined by GPUs, not ASICs. Hope this helps!
- remram 4y agoSo you're saying there's not that much mining power that could "switch over" to Bitcoin or ETH, because hardware is optimized for a specific network and would lose significant efficiency if switched to a different network? That makes sense to me thanks!
- bitxbitxbitcoin 4y agoExactly. If it even ran at all.