Search found 27 matches
- Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:06 pm
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: Namecoin is Prime for a 51% attack
- Replies: 61
- Views: 84347
Re: Namecoin is Prime for a 51% attack
If an attack starts, we could restart the chain at the last lockin with merged mining. Oh, I didn't thought that. Then we would just have to wait until most of the hash prefers to generate namecoins rather than attacking the network. The attack will fail. What a stupid panic I had: nothing can forc...
- Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:25 am
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
- Replies: 44
- Views: 36816
Re: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
Merged mining will pretty sure devalue current Namecoins (what else does it have in common with a 51% attack?) and thus kill Namecoin in the long run , too. Even if merged mining makes the nmc price drop to half, it would not destroy it. It is true that more miners will sell their namecoins, but th...
- Tue Sep 13, 2011 10:28 pm
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
- Replies: 44
- Views: 36816
Re: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
Is it possible to distribute a client with a checkpoint in the future (19099)? Not in the way you mean. [/quote] Well, then I it would be just a checkpoint "now" and merged mining before the announced attack. 19050 ? They have claimed both, that merged mining won't happen and that they will go to t...
- Tue Sep 13, 2011 8:27 pm
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
- Replies: 44
- Views: 36816
Re: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
I didn't thought about that. With merged mining, if most btc miners want namecoin to die, it will die. So what they fear is namecoin being is used as a general purpose currency to compete with bitcoin and devalue it. The point is why miners would prefer attacking another network for free instead of ...
- Tue Sep 13, 2011 7:33 am
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
- Replies: 44
- Views: 36816
Re: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
Maybe making the change to merged mining earlier can solve the problem too?phelix wrote:going back 10.000 blocks is way too much to prove the point. what about going back a 100 blocks?
but a checkpoint is a good idea anyway, even if there was no attack at all.
I don't really know how these checkpoints work.
- Tue Sep 13, 2011 6:08 am
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
- Replies: 44
- Views: 36816
Re: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
Oh, great, you're only going to destroy, not stealing anything.BitcoinEXpress wrote: Not going to steal anything, The NMC creators have about 10 days time so shame on them if I am able to do this.
What are they supposed to do? A checkpoint?
Why do you want that?
- Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:44 am
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
- Replies: 44
- Views: 36816
Re: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
I have some namecoins and have registered a couple of domains and so it bothers me but bitcoinEXpress's actions are totally legit. There is a flaw and he will exploit it and even publicly announces so. Why does he exploit the flaw when its solution is going to be launched soon? The word "legit" doe...
- Mon Sep 12, 2011 10:33 am
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: Namecoin is Prime for a 51% attack
- Replies: 61
- Views: 84347
Re: Namecoin is Prime for a 51% attack
I say it here too. I think it is a bad idea and there's nothing namecoin or bitcoin can gain from it.
Attack a test chain to measure what you can destroy or steal if the motivation is really an experiment.
Attack a test chain to measure what you can destroy or steal if the motivation is really an experiment.
- Mon Sep 12, 2011 10:26 am
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
- Replies: 44
- Views: 36816
Re: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
> Namecoin will rise its value [...]. some people expect the opposite. Nobody can be sure what happens so it is a dangerous experiment. It is only dangerous for the current holders not for the namecoin network (it's already tested). The market should factor the risks and potential gains in the pric...
- Mon Sep 12, 2011 9:08 am
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
- Replies: 44
- Views: 36816
Re: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
It appears that Vince almost have pulled off a successful "community infiltration attack" using ages old trojan horse technique. As far as I can tell this is a live or die test for Bitcoin. If Vince's attack is successful it will be terminal for Bitcoin. Does he knows that merged mining was Satoshi...