From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Xi8Hh-00037A-6O for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 25 Oct 2014 20:50:01 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.214.175 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.175; envelope-from=alex.mizrahi@gmail.com; helo=mail-ob0-f175.google.com; Received: from mail-ob0-f175.google.com ([209.85.214.175]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Xi8Hf-0002M2-RW for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 25 Oct 2014 20:50:01 +0000 Received: by mail-ob0-f175.google.com with SMTP id wm4so430888obc.34 for ; Sat, 25 Oct 2014 13:49:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.132.102 with SMTP id ot6mr2743854oeb.62.1414270194369; Sat, 25 Oct 2014 13:49:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.202.168.142 with HTTP; Sat, 25 Oct 2014 13:49:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <2109053.EM3JWxoz5A@coldstorage> References: <2109053.EM3JWxoz5A@coldstorage> Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2014 23:49:54 +0300 Message-ID: From: Alex Mizrahi To: Bitcoin Dev Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b4721e08d49e20506457057 X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (alex.mizrahi[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1Xi8Hf-0002M2-RW Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] death by halving X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2014 20:50:01 -0000 --047d7b4721e08d49e20506457057 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > For the sake of argument, lets assume that somehow (quite unlikely) Why is it unlikely? Do you believe that the cost of electricity cannot be higher than expected mining revenue? Or do you expect miners to keep mining when it costs them money? > half the mining equipment gets shut off. > The amount of hashes/second is such that it is currently, lets just say, > quite > secure against any takeover. > The equipment won't be simply turned off, it will be up for grabs. Please check this web sites: https://nicehash.com/ https://www.multipool.us/ One can use them in the same way he uses normal mining pools, and they switch between different chains. Say, multipool.us can switch between BTC and PPC (Peercoin). Mining BTC will be less profitable after a halving, so a miner who is willing to maximize his profits might use multipool to auto-switch to something more profitable. Which might be attack-on-Bitcoin. E.g. if 60% of bitcoin's total hashrate is available via "multipools", one can try to pull of a double-spending attack. > Your document makes a long series of assumptions about how this can turn > out > bad with each individually is implausible, together are just fiction. > It sounds like you failed to grasp even basics. --047d7b4721e08d49e20506457057 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=C2=A0
For the sake of argument, lets assume that so= mehow (quite unlikely)

Why is it unlikely? = Do you believe that the cost of electricity cannot be higher than expected = mining revenue?
Or do you expect miners to keep mining when it co= sts them money?
=C2=A0
half the=C2=A0minin= g equipment gets shut off.
The amount of hashes/second is such that it is currently, lets just say, qu= ite
secure against any takeover.

The equipm= ent won't be simply turned off, it will be up for grabs.

=
Please check this web sites:


One can use them in the same way he uses normal mining pools, and = they switch between different chains.
Say, multipool.us can switch between BTC and PPC (Peercoin).
=
Mining BTC will be less profitable after a halving, so a miner who is = willing to maximize his profits might use multipool to auto-switch to somet= hing more profitable.
Which might be attack-on-Bitcoin.
E.g. if 60% of bitcoin's total hashrate is available via "multipo= ols", one can try to pull of a double-spending attack.
=C2= =A0
Your document makes a long series of assumpti= ons about how this can turn out
bad with each individually is implausible, together are just fiction.

It sounds like you failed to grasp even basi= cs.
--047d7b4721e08d49e20506457057--