This is my thinking too. If you are a nation state, and want users to distrust the network, why not just spin up a bunch of miners to attack it and/or regulate white markets?
More direct and easier to attack than 1) trying to figure out if a double spend bug even exists in the first place and 2) secretly double spending low amounts slowly over time that would have virtually no affect on price which means no users would even know. If it isn't enough to change anything does it really matter?
So a "whistle blower" or "hacker" *wink wink* coming out in a few years with the totally organic revelation that a state has had majority hash for the last several years and 1/1000 spends was false over the last several years would not reduce confidence and the market share of Monero ?
Keep in mind the attack is funded by the attack itself, with a net zero cost. The way the state sets up fake drug markets and exchanges, speak easies.
What i'm saying is: yes, and those other things too. They are not limited to only one strategy at a time.
Good point
Guys take this list and ask yourself how much it costs in effort and time to run these attack on the individual. What percentage of this effort does running a server farm to fuck with monero for fun represent to the state ? 1% 2% ? More or even less than 1%
