2 ms·

Litecoin does not solve any problem, just the proof of work algorithm is changed. The block time has nothing to do with it really, it just makes people believe

by nwh 13y ago

Litecoin does not solve any problem, just the proof of work algorithm is changed. The block time has nothing to do with it really, it just makes people believe one confirmation is as strong as any other (Litecoin's are actually just 4 times weaker).

Dylan16807 13y ago
4 times weaker? When you're talking about statistical attacks that depends on getting a very small number of random events ahead of your opponent, I would expect quadrupling the numbers to provide significant additional security in the medium term of 10 to 100 minutes. Clearly a litecoin confirmation is weaker than a bitcoin confirmation, but 4 or 12 litecoin confirmations should be much stronger than 1 or 3 bitcoin confirmations.
- nwh 13y ago
  Confirmations are just a measure of computing power essentially. By saying a transaction needs 3 confirmations you are saying that you require 30 minutes of network hashing time before you call a transaction secure. For the same 30 minutes you'd need 12 Litecoin confirmations. The chance of me solving 4 litecoim blocks is the same as me solving 1 bit coin block, assuming the same hash power and difficulty. In reality Litecoin is quite low in both, so is substantially easier to abuse in the real world.
  - Dylan16807 13y ago
    The chance of solving 4 litecoin blocks is the same as solving 1 bitcoin block, sure. But look at it this way. If bitcoin blocks were once a day, then if you had a few percent of the network power you would get 1 day = 1 confirmation ahead of your opponent all the time. But with bitcoin blocks every few minutes, you have an infinitessimal chance of getting 1 day = hundreds of confirmations ahead. The distribution of timings is much wilder when you're only taking a couple samples. The longest confirmations in the world won't make 2-confirmation transactions completely safe, but 20 confirmations is pretty secure with any length.
  - makomk 13y ago
    No, confirmations are not just a measure of computing power. The difficulty of carrying out attacks with a sub-50% proportion of the total hash power increases exponentially with the number of confirmations, whereas requiring more work per confirmation only gives a linear increase. Satoshi's original whitepaper explains this.

by nwh 13y ago

Dylan16807 13y ago

4 times weaker? When you're talking about statistical attacks that depends on getting a very small number of random events ahead of your opponent, I would expect quadrupling the numbers to provide significant additional security in the medium term of 10 to 100 minutes. Clearly a litecoin confirmation is weaker than a bitcoin confirmation, but 4 or 12 litecoin confirmations should be much stronger than 1 or 3 bitcoin confirmations.

nwh 13y ago
Confirmations are just a measure of computing power essentially. By saying a transaction needs 3 confirmations you are saying that you require 30 minutes of network hashing time before you call a transaction secure. For the same 30 minutes you'd need 12 Litecoin confirmations. The chance of me solving 4 litecoim blocks is the same as me solving 1 bit coin block, assuming the same hash power and difficulty. In reality Litecoin is quite low in both, so is substantially easier to abuse in the real world.
- Dylan16807 13y ago
  The chance of solving 4 litecoin blocks is the same as solving 1 bitcoin block, sure. But look at it this way. If bitcoin blocks were once a day, then if you had a few percent of the network power you would get 1 day = 1 confirmation ahead of your opponent all the time. But with bitcoin blocks every few minutes, you have an infinitessimal chance of getting 1 day = hundreds of confirmations ahead. The distribution of timings is much wilder when you're only taking a couple samples. The longest confirmations in the world won't make 2-confirmation transactions completely safe, but 20 confirmations is pretty secure with any length.
- makomk 13y ago
  No, confirmations are not just a measure of computing power. The difficulty of carrying out attacks with a sub-50% proportion of the total hash power increases exponentially with the number of confirmations, whereas requiring more work per confirmation only gives a linear increase. Satoshi's original whitepaper explains this.