Crypto Investors View On Ethereum Classic 51% Attack Double Spend
A reasonably large amount of Ethereum Classic was double spent in a successful 51% mining attack, I’ll communicate that to you through the lense of a crypto investor…
Bitcoin has formed 2 consecutive chart patterns that are bullish signs.
Coinbase has now banned both the Gab social network AND it’s founder from using the platform, highlighting the dangers of centralisation.
●▬ Earn A Passive Income In Bitcoin ▬▬▬▬▬●
https://cryptoversity.krtra.com/t/zNyVgrke3xoQ
●▬ Take My Online Crypto Courses ▬▬▬▬▬●
https://cryptoversity.krtra.com/t/r54RTiOWLIZa
●▬ Learn How The Crypto Revolution Is Bigger Than The Internet ▬▬▬▬▬●
https://cryptoversity.krtra.com/t/MwQdG7FXEO9c
●▬ Earn Crypto Rewards For Watching My Videos ▬▬▬▬▬●
https://www.patreon.com/TheCryptoverse
●▬ Official Merch ▬▬▬▬▬●
https://planetc.shop/collections/the-cryptoverse
●▬ Donate Crypto Anonymously ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬●
https://btcpay648087.lndyn.com/apps/4LDHdzzzz8XS97g31aX1TTcMGR7Y/pos
●▬ Social Networks ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬●
Steemit: https://steemit.com/@marketingmonk
Twitter: https://twitter.com/ChrisConeyInt
Telegram: https://t.me/TheCryptoverse
Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/TheCryptoverse/
Minds: https://www.minds.com/thecryptoverse
Gab: https://gab.ai/chrisconey
●▬ Sources ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬●
Please become a patron if you'd like the list of research sources.
https://www.patreon.com/TheCryptoverse
#EthereumClassic #DoubleSpend #TechnicalAnalysis
▶️ DTube
▶️ IPFS
It is high time crypto move to a better consensus, first PoW is environmentally not suitable because high energy consumption, secondly,the reported vulnerability
Fantastic coverage as usual, Chris.
The investor view of the 51% attack is a good angle to report on. You’re right; the coverage in most places seems to focus on the technical info because a lot of people don’t fully understand how it works.
Since you talked about one of the fundamentalists pieces of PoW and consensus, and mentioned that the incentive to carry out a double spend is reduced by the fact that the attack itself reduces the market value of the coin, I would say there are two additional things investors would want to know
One is what to do. I think it’s important that people know NOT to spend or move their ETC during this crisis. My understanding is - the older your transaction (ie the more blocks between present block and your block), the harder it is to double spend tour coins. Since many people may freak out with this news and worry that price might decline further, they may be tempted to sell it quick, or move it somewhere. Doing so puts their transaction at risk, and the larger the transaction, the more attractive it looks to the attacker. The investor should weigh this risk against the potential gain or protection from loss they think they’re going to get by selling or moving.
The second is - if the incentive is to not do an attack, who benefits from this attack?
One thing I noticed immediately were the flurry of tweets in response to the attack announcement that mentioned XRP. It really seemed a major anomaly to have so many tweets saying things like “this wouldn’t have happened with XRP” and the like.
Another thing I looked at would be the EthHash algorithm - how many other coins use it, and could they benefit from miners abandoning ETC and moving to another coin using same algorithm?
Next item was the irony of rolling back the chain. As many might remember, the DAO hack long ago was the catalyst for the fork that created ETC, and the major rift was about whether or not a chain should administratively remove transactions on a chain or just let them be. ETH took the admin change road and ETC took the let things be road. So, with a 51% attack, ETC is faced with a decision to roll things back or not, which could be an incentive for some.
so what happened really? they rewrote the blockchain??
The whole BTC pay thing is fascinating in it's functionality and it's adherence to the spirit of the crypto ethos. All I need now is to figure out something that would necessitate it's use. A curse on my lack of entrepreneurship.
Although I understand the motivation behind the ETC fork, I really do not support this kind of forks. They really have weakened the market and the movement for independent and public service orientated activities in general. It's great to have the ability to create private money projects, but the vision of Unity in this field vanished fast. It can be argued that ETH itself was such a deviation. And here I am in ambiguity, since the concept of smart contracts is such a great innovation. The BTC team at the time and today seems to be unable to combine public domain money, innovation and economics. It might be a too big task for the moment. In the future, we might get a new project which can be integrative and responsible enough. Up to now this all is a big experiment to explore the grounds. The power games in the field, threats real and imagined of 51% attacks are just part of this struggle.
Reminds me of why I don't push people to get into crypto; we're still in the technological stone age imo. Where one can be eaten by a saber-toothed tiger or squashed by a wooly mammoth.
How does Etherium Classic recover from news that 51% attacks have happened and are continuing?
Just when you thought it was safe to venture outside ............. Thanks for the great overview, as always!!!
Wow, I always hear the big news here first. With all these forks, I always get nervous with double spend attacks.
Over time, it will become clear that only so many projects can be viably supported by a full ecosystem of participants. While I believe ETC is philosophically sounder than ETH, I just don't see how it survives as anything more than a testnet. Not sure why anyone would hold this as an investment given the million other options in the world today. Go short the S&P instead.
they rewrote the blockchain? wtf?