pull down to refresh

40 sats \ 3 replies \ @sommerfeld 17 Oct 2022 \ parent \ on: BSV will be pursuing criminal charges against the entity/entities responsible 🤡 bitcoin
It's not a new rule, any other miner is free to build on a chain tip with non-empty blocks and the attacking miner is also building on non-empty blocks since he does not have 100% of the hash power.
The ruleset is not decided by the majority hash power holder. Not a soft fork.
write
preview
220 sats \ 2 replies \ @l0k1 17 Oct 2022
Yep, it's simply a 51% attack.
reply
25 sats \ 1 reply \ @sandbeach123old 17 Oct 2022
Got it, my bad. Indeed it's an attack. I guess a fork would need many other conditions to be met.
reply
45 sats \ 0 replies \ @l0k1 17 Oct 2022
The core failure they have is simply network effect and use of a hash function that total internet usage is so large that people can punk them with it, cheaply.
It's so elementary game theory that it just shows you how serious BSV guys are about their project. IE, not even an iota of seriousness.
If Calvin will give me a hundred grand I'll build him a better hash function that won't be so easy to attack. Just Kidding!
reply