Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Because there's a certain critical mass during the descent where 51% attacks are possible, but coinholders still have value to lose.


Part of the attraction and frustration of blockchains has been their obedience to the laws of mathematics.

The answer to the stage of a blockchain you mention would seem to be, "If the blockchain isn't distributed and scaled enough to be resistant to a 51% attack, is there really any value remaining in it?"


If 51% attacks begin emerging, the chain still functions. People just need to require more confirmations. Then you require so many confirmations that the 51% attacks aren't profitable any more.

This kind of chain might become very slow, but still have the same properties as blockchains do have.

Btw the same thing can be thought has having a block time of 1 min, where de facto standard is awaiting 10 confirmations, versus just having 10 minute blocks.


At the point where 51% attacks are happening, it's fair that coinholders lose value. The alternative is that they are able to offload their bags onto some other greater fool who will lose the value instead.


why does this have to be during the descent? 51% attacks are possible at value point.


I think mathgeek is talking about descent in use not descent in price.


Indeed, [1] shows inherent issues with coins that rely purely on transaction fees for eventual security.

[1] On the Instability of Bitcoin Without the Block Reward http://randomwalker.info/publications/mining_CCS.pdf


And more recently, [2], which curiously only considers abandoning PoW in order to deal with issues caused by dwindling block rewards.

[2] Beyond the doomsday economics of “proof-ofwork” in cryptocurrencies https://www.bis.org/publ/work765.pdf


If the market were perfect the coin should become valueless if 51% attacks are happening?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: