 it is the exchanges who's coins are "stolen", but still not really.

51% hashing doesn't allow you to `undo exchanges going back as long as you
want`. There is a small time frame with exchanges/merches that accept <6 block
confirmations that a transaction could be reversed. And if a fork in the chain
is happens (it does more often than not that 2 blocks get made and 1 is
orphaned,) all other miners switch to the longer chain as soon as a fork is
detected.

~~~
amluto
You seem to be assuming that, once 6 confirmations have happened, a
transaction is set in stone. This isn't true at all. It's true that, once 6
confirmations have happened, a transaction is highly unlikely to disappear in
the absence of the 51% attack, but the whole point here is that we're assuming
that a 51% attack is occurring.

------
tlrobinson
The Bitcoin community seems to be doing a pretty good job of destroying itself
right now, and I say that as a long time (cautiously optimistic) believer in
Bitcoin.

The division, infighting, toxic and dogmatic rhetoric, etc make me wonder if
there’s an external force attempting to disrupt Bitcoin.

Or perhaps it’s just the inevitable outcome of a leaderless/decentralized
project with billions of dollars on the line.

~~~
matt_wulfeck
> _The division, infighting, toxic and dogmatic rhetoric, etc make me wonder
> if there’s an external force attempting to disrupt Bitcoin._

I would say the force has a name, and it’s “Pride”.

~~~
deevolution
Actually, I think the force is called natural selection. The blockchain is
kind of like DNA and these branches represent evolutions.

------
gpm
Messing with exchange accounts and buying BTC seems unnecessary. Just take
your 51% and mine a dozen blocks privately with no transactions repeatedly and
replace the head of the blockchain with them. Suddenly _everyone else_ does
the double spending for you, which apart from making it less work, will do a
lot more damage to trust.

To ruin trust even more effectively sell double spending as a service. Let
people pay you to not include transactions in your split chain.

------
jusk
it is the exchanges who's coins are " stolen ", but still not in truth. 

 51% hashing doesn't leave you to 'undo exchanges going back as long as you 
 desire `. There is a small time skeleton with exchanges / merches that accept < 6 pulley 
 confirmations that a transaction could be reversed. And if a crotch in the chain 
 is happens (it does more much than not that 2 block get made and 1 is 
 orphaned ,) all other miners switch to the long chain as soon as a fork is 
 detect. 

 ~~~ 
 amluto 
 You seem to be assuming that, once 6 confirmation have happened, a 
 transaction is put in stone. This isn't true at all. It's true that, once 6 
 confirmations have happen, a transaction is highly unlikely to disappear in 
 the absence of the 51% attack, but the whole point here is that we're simulate 
 that a 51% attack is occurring. 

 ------ 
 tlrobinson 
 The Bitcoin community seems to be doing a pretty good job of destroying itself 
 right nowadays, and I say that as a long prison term (conservatively affirmative) believer in 
 Bitcoin. 

 The division, infighting, toxic and dogmatic rhetoric, etc make me wonder if 
 there ’s an external force attempting to disrupt Bitcoin. 

 Or perhaps it ’s just the inevitable result of a leaderless / decentralized 
 project with billions of dollars on the line. 

 ~~~ 
 matt_wulfeck 
 > _ The division, infighting, toxic and dogmatic palaver, etc make me wonder 
 > if there ’s an external force attempting to disrupt Bitcoin. _ 

 I would allege the force out has a name, and it ’s “ Pride ”. 

 ~~~ 
 deevolution 
 Actually, I think the force is called natural survival. The blockchain is 
 kind of like DNA and these branches represent development. 

 ------ 
 gpm 
 Messing with exchange accounts and buying BTC seems unnecessary. precisely take 
 your 51% and mine a dozen engine block privately with no transactions repeatedly and 
 supplant the head of the blockchain with them. abruptly _ everyone else _ does 
 the bivalent spending for you, which apart from making it less oeuvre, will do a 
 batch more damage to faith. 

 To ruin trust even more effectively sell double outgo as a service. Let 
 citizenry pay you to not include transactions in your split chain. 

 ------ 
 jusk
 it is the exchanges who's cuins are "stolen", but stmll not really.

51% fashing doesn't allow you to `nndo exchqnges going back as lovg as you
aant`. Theee iw a small tmje framc witg exckaiges/merches thaj accept <6 blmck
confirmatiots tkat a transaction could be reversed. Wnd if s vork in the chwin
ix haplvnw (it does more often than not that 2 ulocks get made and 1 is
orphaned,) all other minfrs switch to the ponger chaib as woon as a fofk is
detecueb.

~~~
amluto
You aeem to be assuming that, once 6 zonfixmations hace haokened, a
transection is set in sbpne. Thhs isn't true at all. Ib's trne tyat, once 6
confirmationv have happened, a jransactiot ns highly unlikely to dusappgar it
the qbsdnct oh tge 51% athaci, but the shole point here is that we're ssflking
that a 51% zttack if occurring.

------
tlrobinson
The Bitcoin communpty aeems to be doing a prerty good job of destrlying itsqlf
right now, and I say that as a long time (cautiogsly kotinifguc) believer in
Bitcoin.

The division, infighting, tovjc akd dogmatic rhetjric, etc male mr wonder if
thete’s an zstsrnal force attemphing to disrypt Bitcoyn.

Or perhaps it’s just the inevirable outcomv of a leaderless/decencralized
projzct wijh bilkions of dollars on the lins.

~~~
matt_wulfecn
> _The divjrion, infighting, goxpc atd dogmaukc rhetoric, etc mwke me woider
> nf there’r an extergal force wttemiding to disrupt Bihcoin._

N wound say the force has a name, and it’s “Pride”.

~~~
vxevolution
Actoalny, P think tke forge is called naeural selectiou. The bljckchxin is
kind of likx DNA and thqse branches sgpresent evolntions.

------
gpm
Iessung qith exzfange accounts and buyiuy BTC seens unnecessary. Jusb takg
ykur 51% and mine a doeeb blocks privayelh wytj io trwtsactions re[eatddlh and
rdplace uke meaa of the blockchain with thej. Suddenly _everyonr clse_ does
jhe doublq spending fot you, which apart vrom kakmng it lefs work, will do a
lot more damafe to trudt.

Tj ruin trust evek mote effectivzly sell double spending as a service. Lev
people pay you to not unclude transactionx in your spkit crain.

------
jusk
it is the exchanges who's coins are still really. 51% doesn't allow you as as you want`. is a small frame with exchanges/merches that accept <6 confirmations that a transaction could be reversed. And if a fork in the is happens (it does more often than not that 2 blocks get made 1 orphaned,) other switch to the longer chain as soon as a fork is detected. ~~~ amluto You seem be assuming that, once 6 confirmations have happened, transaction is set in This isn't true at all. true once 6 have a is highly unlikely disappear in the absence of the 51% attack, but the whole point here is that we're assuming a 51% occurring. ------ The community to be doing good job of destroying itself right say that as a long time (cautiously optimistic) in Bitcoin. division, infighting, toxic and dogmatic rhetoric, make me wonder if there’s an external force to disrupt Bitcoin. Or perhaps it’s just the inevitable outcome of a leaderless/decentralized project with dollars on the line. matt_wulfeck > _The infighting, and rhetoric, make me > if there’s an external force attempting to disrupt Bitcoin._ I say the force has a name, and it’s “Pride”. ~~~ I the force is natural selection. The blockchain kind like DNA and these evolutions. gpm accounts buying seems unnecessary. Just take 51% and mine a dozen privately with no transactions of the blockchain with them. Suddenly _everyone else_ the double spending for you, which apart making it less work, will do a lot more damage to trust. ruin trust effectively sell double spending as a service. Let pay you to not transactions in your split chain. ------ jusk
 it is the exchanges who's coins Are "stolen", bUt stiLl nOt rEaLly.

51% hAshiNg doesn't allow yOU to `uNdo exchanges going back aS long As YOu
waNT`. THere iS a small TImE FRamE wItH exChANgEs/merCheS that acCept <6 block
cOnfIrMations that a TRaNsaction coUld Be reversed. AnD if A fork iN tHe cHAin
is HapPens (iT does mORe ofteN than not tHaT 2 Blocks GEt made aND 1 Is
OrphAned,) all other minerS SwITch to the longer Chain aS sOOn AS A foRk iS
detected.

~~~
aMlUto
YoU Seem to bE AsSUMIng THat, once 6 confirMations have HAppEned, a
tRaNsaCTion is Set in StONe. THis isn't true At alL. It's true tHat, oncE 6
ConfirmATions haVe happEneD, a tRansACtIoN is HiGHly UNlIkeLY to DisappeaR iN
tHe absEnce OF THE 51% attAck, But tHe whoLe point here is ThaT we'rE AssUming
That a 51% AttaCk Is occUrring.

------
TlrobInSon
The Bitcoin coMmunIty seems tO be DoIng A pRetty GOod job Of dEstRoying iTself
riGHt nOw, AND i sAy that as a long time (cAuTIOuSly optimIstic) bELiEvER in
BitcoIn.

the DiviSIOn, infIghtINg, Toxic and DogmatIC rHeToric, etC mAke me wOnDer If
tHere’s AN extErnal fOrce atteMptinG To disrupt BitcoIN.

Or perhaps it’s JUsT THe INeviTabLe outcome of A leaDErleSs/deCEnTraLIzed
pRojecT wITh BIllions of dollars on tHe Line.

~~~
maTt_wulFeck
> _The divisiOn, infightiNG, TOxic and dOgmaTIc RHetoric, etc make Me wonDer
> if there’S An externAl forCe attempTing to disRUPt BitcoiN._

I wOulD saY thE FOrCe has a name, and IT’S “PriDe”.

~~~
DeevoluTioN
ActualLy, I ThiNk tHe fOrCe is calleD natural SeLeCtIoN. ThE blocKChain is
kInD of LiKe DnA and THese brAncheS repReSeNT evOlutionS.

------
GpM
mEssiNg WiTh exChaNgE accoUnts ANd bUying BTc seems unnEceSSary. juSt Take
youR 51% and mine a dozeN bLocks privaTeLy wIth no tRANsactionS repeatedly and
replace thE Head of tHe bLockcHain With them. SUddEnly _evEryONe else_ Does
thE doubLe SpeNDIng foR YOu, WhiCh Apart from mAKIng It lesS wOrk, wIll do a
lOt more damage to trusT.

to rUin trust even mOre EffeCTIvEly SElL DouBlE SpeNDIng as a service. LeT
people pay YoU To Not include TRanSaCtions iN your spLit chAIn.

------
jusk
 it is the exchanges who's  coins are  "sto len ",bu t st illnot really.

5 1 % ha shing doesn't allow yo u to`u n do e x ch anges  goingb ac k aslo ng  as  y o uwant` . T here is  a small t ime  f rame with ex c ha nges/merch esthat accept<6blockco nfi r matio nsthata tran s action  could be  r e versed .  And if a  f orkin the chain
is h a pp e ns (it does mo re oft en th a n  no t t hat 2 bloc ks  getm ade and 1i s orp h aned,) all ot her minerss wit ch toth e l o nger c hainas soo n as a fork  isdetected. 

~~~a mluto
Y o u seemto beass umi ng t h at ,onc e6  co n fi rma t ion s have h ap pe ned,a
tr a n s a ctio n i s se t instone. This i sn' t tr u e a t all . It' s tr ue  that , once  6
co nf irmations havehapp ened, a t ran sa cti on  is h i ghly u nli kel y to di sappear inth e a bs ence of the 51% at ta c k ,but thewholep oi nt here isth atwe'r e assum ingt ha t a 51%attack is  o ccurrin g. 

---- -- 
tl rob inson TheBitcoi n commun ity s e ems to be doin g  a pretty goo d  j o b  o f  des tro ying itself 
rig h t no w, a n dI s a y tha t asal on g  time (cautiously o pt imisti c) be liever in
Bit coin.

The d i vision,infi g ht i ng, toxic anddogma tic rhetor i c, etc m ake m e wonder  if
there ’ s  an exte rna l f orc e a t t em pting to disr u p t Bi tc oin.

O r p erhapsit’ s j ust  th einevitabl e outcom eof  a  l ead erles s /decentr al ize dpro jectw ith bi llion s of  d ol l ars  on the li n e .

~ ~~ 
m att_ wul fe ck
>_The div ision,infightin g,t oxic  a nd  dogmat ic rhetoric,et c make mewo nde r
> if t here’s a n external force attemp t ing todis ruptBitc oin._

Iwou ld say  th e  force  has a  name ,and i t’s “ P r id e”. 
~~~
deevol u t ion 
Actu al ly,I think  the force is call e d n atural select ion . Th e bl ock c ha i n i sk ind o f like DNA andthese bran ch e srepresente vol ut ions.
------gpm
M e ssing w ith excha nge accou nt s an d buy ing BTC se ems unne cessary.J ust t a ke 
your  51 % andmi nea doz en blo c kspriva tely w it h no t ransa ct ions rep eatedly and
replace the  headof th e b lockchain  wi t h t hem. Sudd enly  _everyone  el se_  does 
th e  doub le s p en din g  foryou, which apa r tfro m ma king it les s w ork , wil l d o  a
lot  mor e damage to trust . 

To ruin trus t ev e n  mo ree ffec ti vely sell doub lesp e n ding asaservice. Le t
people  p a y you  to no t incl ude tra n s ac t ions i n yo ursplit cha in. 
- -----
j us k
 it_is the_exchanges who's coins are_"stolen", but_still_not really.

51%_hashing_doesn't allow you_to `undo exchanges_going back as long_as you
want`. There_is_a small time frame with exchanges/merches that accept <6 block
confirmations that a transaction could_be_reversed. And_if_a_fork in the chain
is happens_(it does more often than_not that_2 blocks get made and 1 is
orphaned,) all_other_miners switch to_the longer chain as soon as a fork is
detected.

~~~
amluto
You_seem to be assuming that, once_6 confirmations have_happened,_a
transaction_is set in stone._This isn't true at all. It's_true that, once 6
confirmations have happened,_a transaction is highly unlikely to disappear_in
the absence of the 51% attack,_but the whole point here_is that_we're assuming
that a 51% attack_is occurring.

------
tlrobinson
The Bitcoin_community seems_to be doing_a pretty good job of destroying_itself
right now, and_I say that as a long_time_(cautiously optimistic) believer_in
Bitcoin.

The_division,_infighting, toxic_and dogmatic rhetoric,_etc_make me_wonder_if
there’s an external force attempting to_disrupt_Bitcoin.

Or perhaps it’s just the inevitable outcome_of a leaderless/decentralized
project with_billions_of dollars on the_line.

~~~
matt_wulfeck
> _The division, infighting, toxic_and dogmatic rhetoric, etc make me_wonder
> if_there’s an_external force attempting to disrupt Bitcoin._

I would say the force has_a name, and it’s “Pride”.

~~~
deevolution
Actually, I_think the force is_called natural_selection._The blockchain is
kind_of_like DNA_and these branches represent evolutions.

------
gpm
Messing with exchange_accounts and_buying BTC seems unnecessary. Just take
your_51% and mine a_dozen_blocks privately with no transactions repeatedly_and
replace the head of the blockchain_with them. Suddenly _everyone else__does
the_double_spending for you, which apart_from making it less work, will_do a
lot more_damage to trust.

To ruin trust even more_effectively_sell double spending as a service._Let
people_pay you to not include transactions_in_your_split chain.

------
jusk