tmsr - Search: miner cartel

mircea_popescu: to review this : 3address bitcoin can be spent to proper 1address bitcoin by ~anyone~, at ~any time~. in practice these anyone and any time variables will be set by the miner cartel that finally pulls the plug on the 3address shitshow.

mircea_popescu: ah so the idea basically is to tell the inexistent miner cartel not to mine txns they don't want ?

asciilifeform: probably even nao a pretty good haul for the first serious miner to break cartel and unwind the 'soft' liquishit

asciilifeform: buried in this lengthy turd is the entirely valid observation that 'If Miner i cannot obtain a single block posted before Bi, he quits the business. Therefore, we investigate the time between any two consecutive events. As {Ii} is indeed a Bernoulli process, ... ' (concluding with 'miner cartel is +ev and inevitable')

mircea_popescu: anyway, the point being, the miner cartel brink-of-war event didn't proceed, but "equipment" derived from it is now widely deployed, and as you can observe it can selectively disappear txn from the mempool.

mircea_popescu: ie, "miner cartel got beaten to shit, withdrew temporarily, wants to have control over bitcoin! IT WAS PROMISED!!!!".

a111: Logged on 2016-05-24 15:52 mp_at_olivos: the theory whereby "dead to me" is supposed to read "holds a substantial fraction of my assets" and "the difference between these two statements only appeared to me sometime late may, which is coincidentally months after the alleged causative event and also within minutes of channel discussion of the fabulous failure of the miner cartel love tap and subsequent attempts to cover it up" may be either partially false or entirely

mp_at_olivos: the theory whereby "dead to me" is supposed to read "holds a substantial fraction of my assets" and "the difference between these two statements only appeared to me sometime late may, which is coincidentally months after the alleged causative event and also within minutes of channel discussion of the fabulous failure of the miner cartel love tap and subsequent attempts to cover it up" may be either partially false or entirely ☟︎

mircea_popescu: wait, i thought "modern science" established that mp hallucinated miner cartel.

BingoBoingo: <asciilifeform> summary: todd steals mircea_popescu's idea of 'let's change pow to kill miners' << No, more "lets prevent further optimizations from counting to cement current miner cartel"

BingoBoingo: <asciilifeform> 'hk agreement' ?! << Miner cartel formalization, pretty sure on qntra

phf: i actually did some maths and was ready to drop 50btc on an mpex account, but held off for the main reason that i don't see a solution (and there wasn't one found) to minor collusion problem. that conversation happened ~last october~ (or whereabouts), it was framed as a hypothetical, but it was a long precursor to chinese miner conferences (that in turn was serious grounds to suspect potential cartel) and all that other stuff.

asciilifeform: briefly back to thread, i credit miner cartel, as i did in the beginning, as the INEVITABLE consequence of satoshi IDIOCY

asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: i buy the miner cartel! if you recall, i walked into #b-a with miner cartel.

mircea_popescu: your idea with (indepoendent miners very threadbare + sybil) is much higher latent heat than the (miner cartel) situation.

mircea_popescu: there is an outstanding issue ; i dunno how much you actually still credit the (separate network - not miner cartel) theory. i dunno how to approach that to make it plain to you it holds no water. tho it necessarily doesn't.

mircea_popescu: moreover, and more importantly, if you give over to the government the franchise to interpret private agreements, you provably construct a government even more far reaching than the welfare state, sitting in ~an equivalent position of the miner cartel but for contracts, and soon to issue "licenses to contract" or somesuch insanity.

assbot: Logged on 10-03-2016 10:49:38; mircea_popescu: so far, nsa-gavin, prb and [prolly] the miner cartel are all preparing something or the other.

mircea_popescu: so far, nsa-gavin, prb and [prolly] the miner cartel are all preparing something or the other. ☟︎

mircea_popescu: but anyway, yes, if you believe 1 in 100, they yes, you don't need cartel, just persistent miner.

mircea_popescu: it is an intricate discussion, and one i'm unwillingto carry in the full detail, but on the basis of what i have seen, it is my considered opinion that at the time in discussion, the miner cartel was running a ~half hour block delay thing.

mircea_popescu: with any luck it'll be something like "miner cartel, what a ridiculous idea - not like the anon derps involved are a) known to be idiots and b) have certain incentive do do exactly this! moreover, the much simpler explanation is that... uh... uh... mp conspiracy! and scam! and fraud! and he doesn't care about bitcoin! and i'm an idiot that'll show him!!11"

mircea_popescu: http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=05-03-2016#1422884 << well, the privacy risks aren't exactly dubious in that i don't atm see how ring signatures would prevent miner cartel from attacking bitbet. except, of course, if predicated on "miners are lazy and dumb". which is true - until they aren't. much like ants are lazy and dumb, until they get into the fridge, at which point they'll dumbly&lazily never want to leave. ☝︎

assbot: sciencehatesyou comments on Potential Evidence of Miner Collusion Or An Active 51+ Percent Cartel ... ( http://bit.ly/1LU4iyK )

BTC-Mining: A miner or cartel who controls more than fifty percent of the hashing capacity of the bitcoin mining network has the potential to fraudulently double-spend recent transactions. With majority of hashing power the attacker has the technical ability to mine blocks which do not include a previous spend transactions from the miner but instead include a double spend of the coin. With majority