Next scheduled rescrape ... never
Version 1
Last scraped
Scraped on 18/08/2025, 07:32:55 UTC
So let's ask the uncomfortable question: Could Bitcoin face the same? And if so, would exchanges freeze BTC deposits, grinding everything to a halt?
The nature of Proof of Work is in a way that 51% attack is a real attack vector but it depends on a big "if". IF one entity can gain control of such a large hashrate they can theoretically carry out such an attack.

2 more things, you can't really compare any altcoins with bitcoin.
Also this already happened a long time ago in bitcoin as well. The mining pool was called GHash.io back in 2014 and it briefly gained more than 50% of the total hashrate (for real) and nothing was halted and nothing broke. The miners left that pool (switched to other pools) and its hashrate came down.


Quote
Mining centralization is real. Foundry + Antpool already control ~50% of Bitcoin's hashrate. It's just expensive to attack - not impossible.
I haven't verified how much hashrate these pools control to verify your 50% claim but you are forgetting that FoundryUSA is a US based mining pool while Antpool is a Chinese based mining pool! That is not called centralization.
In fact this is the exact opposite since these pools are located in completely different jurisdictions.

Quote
A well-funded adversary (cough nation-state cough) could try.
And what would they gain by spending such a massive amount of their taxpayers money? Specially while they can "fight" bitcoin using much cheaper tactics like simply banning it!

Quote
Would Proof-of-Stake fix this? Or just replace mining barons with staking cartels?
PoS is a broken algorithm that died as soon as it was invented (ie. ~2012). The only reason why it is still used by shitcoins is that it is a cheap way of getting a coin that has lost the community to stay alive.

Quote
Should exchanges decide network integrity? Kraken just set a precedent.
They should not and they are not.
Original archived Re: If Monero Can Suffer 50% Hashrate Risk, Why Can't Bitcoin?
Scraped on 18/08/2025, 07:28:16 UTC
So let's ask the uncomfortable question: Could Bitcoin face the same? And if so, would exchanges freeze BTC deposits, grinding everything to a halt?
The nature of Proof of Work is in a way that 51% attack is a real attack vector but it depends on a big "if". IF one entity can gain control of such a large hashrate they can theoretically carry out such an attack.

2 more things, you can't really compare any altcoins with bitcoin.
Also this already happened a long time ago in bitcoin as well. The mining pool was called GHash.io back in 2014 and it briefly gained more than 50% of the total hashrate (for real) and nothing was halted and nothing broke. The miners left that pool and its hashrate came down.


Quote
Mining centralization is real. Foundry + Antpool already control ~50% of Bitcoin's hashrate. It's just expensive to attack - not impossible.
I haven't verified how much hashrate these pools control to verify your 50% claim but you are forgetting that FoundryUSA is a US based mining pool while Antpool is a Chinese based mining pool! That is not called centralization.
In fact this is the exact opposite since these pools are located in completely different jurisdictions.

Quote
A well-funded adversary (cough nation-state cough) could try.
And what would they gain by spending such a massive amount of their taxpayers money? Specially while they can "fight" bitcoin using much cheaper tactics like simply banning it!

Quote
Would Proof-of-Stake fix this? Or just replace mining barons with staking cartels?
PoS is a broken algorithm that died as soon as it was invented (ie. ~2012). The only reason why it is still used by shitcoins is that it is a cheap way of getting a coin that has lost the community to stay alive.

Quote
Should exchanges decide network integrity? Kraken just set a precedent.
They should not and they are not.