Quote from: lil_jay890 on October 04, 2015, 08:22:53 pm

Quote from: DataSecurityNode on October 04, 2015, 08:19:36 pm

Quote from: godzirra on October 04, 2015, 08:08:47 pm

Personally I appreciate every peek into what's going on behind the scenes. I want all the info I can get. For better or for worse. I can temper my own expectations.

And a "peak" is the right word for it.. there is plenty more that just hasn't been announced on the forum.

To be blunt.. with some of the toxic demanding entitled attitudes that surround this forum, I don't blame any company who doesn't want to have their names made the play things of some characters here. Stan does his best to edify and be welcoming... but it is almost inevitable that the mobs first response is to demand name changes, get shared dropped, and tell them how they should be running their business to name just a few. Even I have gotten caught up in this backwards culture at times. Don't expect this forum to be where announcements are made in the future. Expect to see them first in Reuters and the like.

Any real company with real business plans shouldn't give a shit about what this community thinks or posts on this forum

Have you thought that through, or are you shooting from the hip?

Quote from: monsterer on October 02, 2015, 06:08:07 pm

Yes, this argument is very much a clone of Rune's old argument, and it falls down in exactly the same way, once you strip away all the complicated sounding wording:

* A mining pool is no different to a single, powerful bitcoin miner
* All the miners in bitcoin collectively spend 25 BTC per block on block production
* In order to turn a miner 'to the dark side', you must bribe them with more than their expected block reward
* In order to turn a majority of miners, you need to spend more than the entire network does every block

This is the 51% attack, nothing new.

You don't need to spend more than the entire network to pull this off.  An attacker only needs to spend enough to make mining unprofitable UNLESS you mine for them.

In other words, as profit margins decrease (due to free market competition) the cost of attacking the network decreases by a factor of X^2

If you have 5% profit margins, then I can make the network unprofitable for all pool miners for just $2000 per day.
If you have 1% profit margins, then I can make the network unprofitable for all pool miners for under $100 per day.

The only defense the network has is to eliminate the use of public pools where anyone can join.     Once you eliminate public pools you are left with at most 10 private pools because if you have pools smaller than 10% of the hash power then your variance will eat up any remaining profit margins and thus make it unprofitable.

Conclusion from this is that the cost of attacking the network is the cost bribing / coercing 10 people and these 10 people could easily collude.  Might as well have them simply SIGN the blocks rather than spend energy mining them.   After all they could easily double spend at will by arbitrarily reversing the bitcoin blockchain by simply stopping production on the real chain and producing a fork.