On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Andy Jennings <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 7:50 AM, Mike Frank < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Even if the total resources deployed on the Bitcoin network were to >> someday fall to such a low level that a single attacker could easily produce >> a forged chain of transactions, that would only mean that this attacker >> could double-spend their own coins from that point onwards, not that they >> could nullify the established chain that was already in existence and >> accepted by all nodes on the network. >> > > If the attacker truly had disproportionate computing resources, couldn't he > go back to the chain as it was a year ago and start extending from there? > Yes, but that would require redoing all that work and then catching up with and passing the consensus chain. I suppose if the attacker had 2x the aggregate power of the rest of the network (2/3rds of the total), it would only take him a year to catch up. Still, in *any* kind of "one computron-one-vote" system, any entity that controls most of the compute power would be an absolute dictator anyway, so it's not really a valid criticism of the idea of using this as an election protocol, in the context of such a computer-centrified notion of democracy. Tyranny of the majority and all that. > -Mike -- Full name: Michael Patrick Frank Email addr.: [email protected] (pers. email) Snail mail: 820 Hillcrest Ave., Quincy, FL, 32351-1618 Phone/voicemail: (413) 842-6670 (main number, uses Google Voice) Webpage URL: http://www.facebook.com/M.P.Frank (pers. profile)
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
