They're trying hard not to discourage academic research into Bitcoin, or to scare off security researchers. They desperately want more security researchers. I

They're trying hard not to discourage academic research into Bitcoin, or to scare off security researchers. They desperately want more security researchers. I actually think Gavin is handling this very well, and the response seems well-measured. That said, the way this whole paper has been released smacks of sensationalism. I'll take the Eyal at his word that he's concerned with Bitcoin's future, but failing to adhere to the standards of responsible disclosure and entitling a blog post "Bitcoin is Broken" really make me wonder about what they're trying to do, other than self-promote. Besides, this basic attack is something that has been discussed since 2010. There may be a few subtle differences in the paper, but based on my reading of the blog post, this is an attack that mining pools have even accused each other of doing a year or two ago. It's a potential problem, but definitely not a "Bitcoin is fundamentally broken" problem as the blog post claims.