Relevant question, how do we know for sure, asic vendors sell miners as efficient as they use for themselves to mine..?
-
-
And PoW changes don't hurt the network.
-
A PoW change is a natural defense mechanism of the Bitcoin network. If we started seeing block reorgs, the network can’t be trusted and is unusable. EVERYTHING would come to a screeching halt.
-
False. The only thing that couldn't be trusted is the commonly accepted number of confirmations considered safe right now.
-
No number of blocks could be considered confirmed in such a scenario (including the present reality, really). Which means the entire purpose of mining is gone.
-
That is not true at all. Unless shadow hardware that was never deployed is built, it would be very noticeable in block intervals(and difficulty over longer periods) that hashrate disappeared and is likely doing something shady.
-
It would likely simply result in a sliding scale of confirmations considered safe based on the value content of blocks that could indicate potential incentive to reorg and double spend.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Getting big and successful does not require attacking the network by centralising mining.
-
Is bitmain attacking the network because of their relative amount of hashpower or because they are doing something malicious with that hashpower?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Yes & this was a foreseeable risk they should have known about. Didn't they know the BTC community has a talented deep bench (Szabo, Carallo, Wiulle, Back, Todd, Lombrozo, Luke, Maxwell, etc.) that's super committed to creating durably unstoppable, uncensorable money?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.