On 1 Nov 2018, at 11:57, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hoi,
Bitcoin and its ilk rely on an overabundance of energy. In this day and age
the speculation of these "currencies" is irresponsible. The best attack on
this pyramide game is to stay away from it.
Thanks,
GerardM
On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 at 10:38, Robert Rohde <rarohde(a)gmail.com> wrote:
What is a
51% attack?
A 51% attack is when a single malicious entity controls >51% of the
computing power being used to validate the blockchain of a particular
digital currency. Blockchain-based digital currencies rely on a consensus
of computing participants acting in good faith to verify transactions and
coin ownership. However, if a single entity controls a majority of the
compute power, then it is possible for them to maliciously validate bad
transactions to steal, double spend, and otherwise commit fraud using the
currency.
Smaller digital currencies, with fewer participants acting to maintain
their blockchain, are generally more vulnerable to this kind of attack. A
bad actor can rent a large block of computing power and then use it to
attack a small blockchain. Such attacks have been becoming more common,
though the largest coins (e.g. BTC) are still resistant due to the size of
their community.
https://www.coindesk.com/blockchains-feared-51-attack-now-becoming-regular/
I don't know anything about FoldingCoin and whether it is more or less
vulnerable to this kind of fraud than other cryptocurrencies.
However, the 51% attack may just be the death of many smaller alt-coins,
unless an effective countermeasure can be developed.
-Robert Rohde
On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 8:23 AM James Salsman
<jsalsman(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Geni, it's the "Day of the Dead" now so I want to attempt to resurrect
this thread.
Is FoldingCoin still vulnerable to a 51% attack? What is a 51% attack?
Do you think it is reasonable for the Foundation to convert bitcoin to
FoldingCoin as part of its program to source clean electricity?
Best regards,
Jim
On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 7:21 AM James Salsman <jsalsman(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>> Cryptocurrency. If your first thought isn't "how could a scammer
>> exploit this" you are doing it wrong.
>
> I've thought about that for several hours now, and I'm sure scammers
> far prefer bitcoin. Folding@Home's lab director is a partner
> Andreessen Horowitz, so he has certainly had no lack of resources to
> defend against the possibility, and I am persuaded that the Indiana
> nonprofit behind FLDC is sincere and acting in good faith at present.
> If the Foundation is hesitant, they might sponsor an audit of either
> or both, but the Folding@Home project is so established that its
> article is featured on enwiki.
>
> I have no financial interest in any cryptocurrency, and I never have,
> and I don't have a familial interest with anyone who I am aware has
> any either.
>
> Best regards,
> Jim
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: