pull down to refresh

The "51% attack", while theoretically possible, ignores most adult game theory analysis.
So the premise is, a company will spend billions of dollars and take on tons of debt in order to destroy bitcoin and then rule over a worthless chain? Then they can payback their debt and shareholders with what??
Further, a public company, with public officers are going to engage in provable fraud? There will be criminal charges over that.
The moment mining complicity in double spend attacks was detected, bitcoin would crash by 70-90%. There is literally no value in the network at that point....
There was a time, when "51% attacks" did make sense....when the total cost to achieve it was in the few million dollar range...that is, it could still be funded by single actor...at the current investment levels required, there are too many legal entanglements that prevent that.
this territory is moderated
I understand and I agree, but regardless the game theory and the disincentives to destroy bitcoin for miners, technically speaking mining 5 blocks in a row could give them the chance to "rewrite" the blockchain history for those blocks?
reply
29 sats \ 0 replies \ @freetx 11h
I suppose technically, but they can't predict ahead of time when they will ever get "5 blocks in a row".
Its like being able to predict: Starting now, I'm going to flip a coin and get heads to come up 8 times in row. Certainly theoretically possible but very very unlikely.
reply