Ethereum Classic has suffered a 4,000-block long reorganization, its second such incident in five days. The first attack, which saw more than 3,000 blocks reorged, saw an attacker steal more than 800,000 ETC, worth about $5.6 million.
This is a classic attack for ETH Classic. Who is HOLDing it?
cryptroopPlatinum | QC: CC 139, ETH 42 | TraderSubs 301 month ago
Immutable chain reorgs
natufianSilver | QC: CC 85, DOGE 38 | IOTA 901 month ago
I remember about a year or so ago about the time of ETC's first 51% attack, there was talk about exchanges potentially adapting automatic retaliatory mining to wrestle their funds back, to drive up the cost of such an attack (assuming the original attacker choose to persist) or to discourage this type of attack in general up to the value of the heist or beyond.
Obviously they haven't implemented this; does anyone know if they definitively decided against it or if they just put it on a back burner and may look into it again now that it's an issue?
Atm it cost $555k an hour to 51% attack Bitcoin, given you can source that hashpower.
BrunswickstreetPlatinum | QC: CC 185, BTC 162, ADA 50 | TraderSub1 month ago
This page is actually terrible at determining the cost of a 51% attack. The hard thing about a 51% attack isnt the power needed but to actually get hold of the hashrate.
Its like me saying instead of buying tomatoes just buy tomatoe seeds its way cheaper! What I'm not mentioning is the water, fertilizer and time you need to grow the tomatoe until you can eat it.
I would guess the real cost of an hour of a 51% attack on Bitcoin probably already lies in the billions right now.
well for what it is that site doesn't take other things into account
To attack Dash the attacker would also need >50% of masternodes and that is many millions in USD. So that site isn't really accurate so I would take it with a grain of salt.
Yeah, [btc is a shining example ](https://news.bitcoin.com/5-mining-50-btc-hashrate/)of security through trustless decentralisation
Edit: so many downvotes, no actual counterargument. *is it a cult? o_0*
Darius510Platinum | QC: CC 344, BTC 113, ETH 99 | r/pcgamin1 month ago
Because the counterarguments are so stupidly obvious that no one is even bothering to make them.
Please enlighten this lower being with your obvious information confirming how PoW doesn’t inherently favour large centralised mining farms via economies of scale, and how that isn’t clearly prevalent and increasing in bitcoin
bryanwagSilver | QC: CC 209, PRL 17 | NANO 6381 month ago
The more accurate way to say it is there is only room for 1 PoW coin per PoW algorithm. You can tune your algorithm so that ASICs designed for Bitcoin or Ethereum have little advantage over GPU/CPU when mining your coin. RandomX used by Monero is such example.
This 100%. These attacks have made me intuitively skeptical of all PoW coins that aren't XMR. The CPU bound RandomX and the decent "background" CPU miner built in to monerod make it more distributed. Pools and ASICs are bad. This proves it imo.
vegaslunaPlatinum | QC: ETH 201, CC 107, BTC 35 | TraderSub1 month ago
PoW has both spam and 51% atk vectors. its in its final days of providing blockchain security... ETH2 will make PoW obsolete early adopter technology.
necropuddiGold | QC: ADA 17 | r/Investing 151 month ago
I still think there's room for Bitcoin in the ecosystem in the long run as the digital gold (and not currency due to its inflexibility), just that the price will max out soon due to electricity constraints. 20-30k BTC is like Canada's electricity output at equilibrium, which I think would already be pushing the limits. Anything like 100k is just ridiculous (might top out at 100k briefly but it won't hold). You can't be using up China or USA's total electricity output on a bunch of ASICs and not have something go wrong (either government[s] intervention or just attack vectors flying at you from every direction).
I think you're ignoring one of the biggest factors, which is how much value is also going to be transferred on the network, which adds value to the technology. Not to mention that Tether can print as many tokens as they want without fear of consequences.
the more shocking is that its still listed in "reputable" exchanges !
aminokPlatinum | BTC 1321, ETH 1101, CC 422 | TraderSubs1 month ago
There are only two high-volume chains. Ethereum at #1 and Bitcoin at #2:
There was a interesting metric I saw about taking a ledger, removing all transactions from exchange addresses, large transactions (bigger than $500k USD moved per transaction) and transactions going back and forth from the same addresses. By excluding these, you can exclude most of the ways blockchains "fake" volume.
If you did this, you'd see Dogecoin has 5x the "meaningful" volume BCash has.
thebeesarebros3 - 4 years account age. 100 - 200 comment karma.1 month ago