Search found 27 matches

by jtimon
Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:06 pm
Forum: General Discussion
Topic: Namecoin is Prime for a 51% attack
Replies: 61
Views: 39559

Re: Namecoin is Prime for a 51% attack

If an attack starts, we could restart the chain at the last lockin with merged mining. Oh, I didn't thought that. Then we would just have to wait until most of the hash prefers to generate namecoins rather than attacking the network. The attack will fail. What a stupid panic I had: nothing can forc...
by jtimon
Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:25 am
Forum: General Discussion
Topic: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
Replies: 44
Views: 14059

Re: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain

Merged mining will pretty sure devalue current Namecoins (what else does it have in common with a 51% attack?) and thus kill Namecoin in the long run , too. Even if merged mining makes the nmc price drop to half, it would not destroy it. It is true that more miners will sell their namecoins, but th...
by jtimon
Tue Sep 13, 2011 10:28 pm
Forum: General Discussion
Topic: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
Replies: 44
Views: 14059

Re: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain

Is it possible to distribute a client with a checkpoint in the future (19099)? Not in the way you mean. [/quote] Well, then I it would be just a checkpoint "now" and merged mining before the announced attack. 19050 ? They have claimed both, that merged mining won't happen and that they will go to t...
by jtimon
Tue Sep 13, 2011 8:27 pm
Forum: General Discussion
Topic: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
Replies: 44
Views: 14059

Re: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain

I didn't thought about that. With merged mining, if most btc miners want namecoin to die, it will die. So what they fear is namecoin being is used as a general purpose currency to compete with bitcoin and devalue it. The point is why miners would prefer attacking another network for free instead of ...
by jtimon
Tue Sep 13, 2011 7:33 am
Forum: General Discussion
Topic: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
Replies: 44
Views: 14059

Re: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain

phelix wrote:going back 10.000 blocks is way too much to prove the point. what about going back a 100 blocks?

but a checkpoint is a good idea anyway, even if there was no attack at all.
Maybe making the change to merged mining earlier can solve the problem too?
I don't really know how these checkpoints work.
by jtimon
Tue Sep 13, 2011 6:08 am
Forum: General Discussion
Topic: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
Replies: 44
Views: 14059

Re: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain

BitcoinEXpress wrote: Not going to steal anything, The NMC creators have about 10 days time so shame on them if I am able to do this.
Oh, great, you're only going to destroy, not stealing anything.
What are they supposed to do? A checkpoint?
Why do you want that?
by jtimon
Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:44 am
Forum: General Discussion
Topic: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
Replies: 44
Views: 14059

Re: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain

I have some namecoins and have registered a couple of domains and so it bothers me but bitcoinEXpress's actions are totally legit. There is a flaw and he will exploit it and even publicly announces so. Why does he exploit the flaw when its solution is going to be launched soon? The word "legit" doe...
by jtimon
Mon Sep 12, 2011 10:33 am
Forum: General Discussion
Topic: Namecoin is Prime for a 51% attack
Replies: 61
Views: 39559

Re: Namecoin is Prime for a 51% attack

I say it here too. I think it is a bad idea and there's nothing namecoin or bitcoin can gain from it.
Attack a test chain to measure what you can destroy or steal if the motivation is really an experiment.
by jtimon
Mon Sep 12, 2011 10:26 am
Forum: General Discussion
Topic: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
Replies: 44
Views: 14059

Re: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain

> Namecoin will rise its value [...]. some people expect the opposite. Nobody can be sure what happens so it is a dangerous experiment. It is only dangerous for the current holders not for the namecoin network (it's already tested). The market should factor the risks and potential gains in the pric...
by jtimon
Mon Sep 12, 2011 9:08 am
Forum: General Discussion
Topic: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain
Replies: 44
Views: 14059

Re: implications of merged mining / shared blockchain

It appears that Vince almost have pulled off a successful "community infiltration attack" using ages old trojan horse technique. As far as I can tell this is a live or die test for Bitcoin. If Vince's attack is successful it will be terminal for Bitcoin. Does he knows that merged mining was Satoshi...