3 ms·

The NSA probably specializes in general purpose computational power, they couldn't afford to compete with ASICs at this point. But they probably could destroy a

The NSA probably specializes in general purpose computational power, they couldn't afford to compete with ASICs at this point. But they probably could destroy any alt-coin alternative to bitcoin in a heartbeat, especially Litecoin which is designed to be mined by general purpose hardware.

dragonwriter 13y ago
> The NSA probably specializes in general purpose computational power, I would agree that this is likely in the sense that the bulk of their expenditures on computing power are likely directed at general purpose computing power. That doesn't really mean that they couldn't have expended fairly vast amounts on special purpose computing, as well. > they couldn't afford to compete with ASICs at this point. Given that the NSA is kind of concerned about monitoring things (especially things used by people who are particularly concerned about avoiding government monitoring), and given the degree to which people with that interest have been the focus of bitcoin, on what basis do you assume that they didn't get in on the ground floor with ASICS as they became available (or earlier)?
- tlrobinson 13y ago
  ASICs (or mining in general) aren't needed to monitor all Bitcoin transactions. A mining node is indistinguishable from a non-mining (full) node. The only reason for ASICs is mining (either legitimate or as an attack)
johnnyanony 13y ago
>The NSA probably specializes in general purpose computational power, they couldn't afford to compete with ASICs this is an absurd statement because the us military, nsa, and cia design their own custom chips and have a black budget to finance the operations and some of the most talented and experienced mathematicians, scientists, and programmers to back them up. when the central banks actually find bitcoin to be a threat they will crack the encryption, do a 51% attack, or conduct some other discrediting attack on its validity and security. I am short term bullish on bitcoin though I am hoping for the best for btc or other decentralized digital currencies.

dragonwriter 13y ago

> The NSA probably specializes in general purpose computational power, I would agree that this is likely in the sense that the bulk of their expenditures on computing power are likely directed at general purpose computing power. That doesn't really mean that they couldn't have expended fairly vast amounts on special purpose computing, as well. > they couldn't afford to compete with ASICs at this point. Given that the NSA is kind of concerned about monitoring things (especially things used by people who are particularly concerned about avoiding government monitoring), and given the degree to which people with that interest have been the focus of bitcoin, on what basis do you assume that they didn't get in on the ground floor with ASICS as they became available (or earlier)?

tlrobinson 13y ago
ASICs (or mining in general) aren't needed to monitor all Bitcoin transactions. A mining node is indistinguishable from a non-mining (full) node. The only reason for ASICs is mining (either legitimate or as an attack)

johnnyanony 13y ago

>The NSA probably specializes in general purpose computational power, they couldn't afford to compete with ASICs this is an absurd statement because the us military, nsa, and cia design their own custom chips and have a black budget to finance the operations and some of the most talented and experienced mathematicians, scientists, and programmers to back them up. when the central banks actually find bitcoin to be a threat they will crack the encryption, do a 51% attack, or conduct some other discrediting attack on its validity and security. I am short term bullish on bitcoin though I am hoping for the best for btc or other decentralized digital currencies.