[–]Nalbarcam0 points
3 points
3 points
(+3|-0)
ago
Quite confident, as random people who wish to mine the currency are rewarded for participating in the network hashing transactions. Certain chains don't even permit the miners to pick and choose transactions, and it would be exceptionally cryptographically difficult to control a majority of the decentralized computers AND have them pick and choose the same transactions. If mass amounts of miners or mining warehouses wanted to pick and choose which transactions to allow through and to not allow others, the rest of the network would be able to witness this and behave accordingly. Actually the network becomes less stable and easier to manipulate as chain splits off, like with Bitcoin Core's suggested lightning network & segregated witness nodes, where smaller copies of receipt lists are held off-chain, essentially bringing back the problem of double spending again. Some reading
The instance of Bitcoin, recently in August 2017 it "forked" in what could be referred to as a 51% attack. Where at least 51% of the network of nodes decided to change the protocol and split off from the original chain of transactions. So now we have Bitcoin "Core" or as it's known, Bitcoin, and then we have the technically original Bitcoin now named "Bitcoin Cash." Essentially a cooperating group of "attacker" nodes made a duplicate of the blockchain and touted it as the real thing despite the fact that the protocol has been severely modified. Some reading
[–] Cantilever [S] 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago
In light of this statement, how confident are you that the system is still secure (if it ever was)?
[–] Nalbarcam 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
Quite confident, as random people who wish to mine the currency are rewarded for participating in the network hashing transactions. Certain chains don't even permit the miners to pick and choose transactions, and it would be exceptionally cryptographically difficult to control a majority of the decentralized computers AND have them pick and choose the same transactions. If mass amounts of miners or mining warehouses wanted to pick and choose which transactions to allow through and to not allow others, the rest of the network would be able to witness this and behave accordingly. Actually the network becomes less stable and easier to manipulate as chain splits off, like with Bitcoin Core's suggested lightning network & segregated witness nodes, where smaller copies of receipt lists are held off-chain, essentially bringing back the problem of double spending again. Some reading
The instance of Bitcoin, recently in August 2017 it "forked" in what could be referred to as a 51% attack. Where at least 51% of the network of nodes decided to change the protocol and split off from the original chain of transactions. So now we have Bitcoin "Core" or as it's known, Bitcoin, and then we have the technically original Bitcoin now named "Bitcoin Cash." Essentially a cooperating group of "attacker" nodes made a duplicate of the blockchain and touted it as the real thing despite the fact that the protocol has been severely modified. Some reading