pull down to refresh
158 sats \ 3 replies \ @anon 12 Aug \ on: Monero and the 51% attack that maybe isn't a 51% attack - BitMex Research news
What a shitcoin.
It’s not that qubic has 51%… but the fact they generated so much hashrate so quickly.
If some no name practically unheard of shitcoin can cause this much doubt and destruction, with 6+ block reorgs from “mining” their made-up AI chain (that does what again?)
Monero is toast. Any company or business or heaven forbid government that wants to can easily rent the CPUs and reorg after 10 blocks and do a pretty good double spend.
Even 12, 14, 16 blocks or ~ 30 minutes of rented hash can completely wreck the network and “qubic” some small shitcoin ‘mining their own coin’ is well on their way to doing this.
What a disaster.
A big increase in marketing does sound like it would increase its market exposure and attract more users, so their marketing play and everyone talking about them worked and the increase makes sense.
but it's still a nothing-burger for Monero, if it was this easy for anyone to "wreck it", it isn't getting any easier, a new player now would have to compete with all the current XMR miners, plus the Qubic attackers, driving up difficulty even further then each will have a smaller share of rewards and even less of a overall effect
reply
Does this mean you don't see this Qubic thing as a threat to monero?
reply
No because it's not sustainable in the long term and as we all know the money printer has its consequences
For starters their coin will go through a halving in a few days, slashing the mining subsidy in half, so they'll have half of the printed money to pump their scam and it won't be as attractive to miners anymore. And the coin is definitely not going up in price to make up for it
But Qubic alone may not be a threat but this period has indeed being an "annoyance" so it shows something to be fixed still and the community is discussing proposals to prevent this type of selfish mining in the future, but there is no urgency and no threat for now. https://github.com/monero-project/research-lab/issues/136
reply