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.
Where would you hear the complaints ? Reddit censors negative comments, twitter is bots and noise... One out of every thousand small amount double spend is millions of dollars in the aggregate on a long enough timeline, but not individually painful enough to alert anyone.
You cannot prove to me that this is not happening, not even in a round about way through inference the way moneroinflation .com can show inflation is not taking place.
That is all the evidence i need to make my case that this is an issue.
With Bitcoin, ( or more accurately public ledger blockchains, i'm not shilling Bitcoin vs Monero) anyone can know where and when even dust is lost.
Bribing the merchants would leave a "paper trail" or "finger print" of sorts as just a few merchants who receive such an offer but reject it or merchants who accepted but defect later, would be loose ends. Way too much investment in people and messy people management.
Several strategic blows to undermine it would be hands of with little pointing back to the attacker.
The earliest way we would know is by repeated reports on forums of issues. Then we run into more problems:
How long has this been going on ? How can we even check ?
Are these reports trustworthy or an attack ?
For instance, certain users are less likely to report anything in the first place; persecuted substance users and sellers, small holders.
The reporting venues themselves are numerous and i've noticed we rely on certain people to crosspost news (such as about haveno) from simplex, matrix, reddit, nostr, monero, twitter.
Several fresh accounts with few followers could post a complaint on each of those platforms every day for months and no one would notice. The sub-Reddit is censoring unfavorable posts about Monero, and so its "news" is skewed. Monero town and Matrix a are a pain to sign up for.
So a sub-group of a sub-group will even know.
What if everyone was looking at the Black marble flood attack but ignoring the frequency of reorgs during that attack?
Something like moneroinflation .com having a reorg tracker, with report inputs from accross the network to account for local signal decay bias might be useful, but still, even with active pattern seeking, it's the type of attack that majority hash can carry out in very very small doses, say, only on purchases of a few cents, that in the aggregate amount to thousands.
Then at some juncture of weakness for the network, like a network upgrade or contentious fork: Bam: and in the chaos no one knows whats going on long enough to lose maket cap and users that will never return.
Again, i'm looking for a technical reason majority hash could not be held by a single entity right now accross the several trusted pools, and what they could do if they did , and how we would even know.
I'm looking through historical posts with similar questions but not finding good ansers, maybe i will eventually.
Any standard reply, such as : it is unlikely, why would they, or we would find a way to fight it, while possibly true, is cope as far as i'm concerned.
Btw P2pool solves the custodial payout issue of trad-pools, but as far as i can tell, it does not prevent the coordination of individual nodes behind p2pool.
Apple did that with...everything. Other companies focused on hardware specs, Apple optimized it for grandma.
nostr:npub14a6q6xvt4wuv0wpdpfr336e4fweldtu6np3ehpw55h83xuw2h2zsgyz6rn check out the new Bitcoin Takeover episode by nostr:npub12qz56plzehejkyp4waaannmnny4y4c30j8q55a3wlk49haslga2snypdx8 interviewing Pete Rizzo.
Does an amazing job articulating why Toxics don't make sense and the corner this new narrative has painted themselves into, based on the history and nature of Bitcoin.
We need a Monero nation-state tobafop monero as legal currency, like for El salvadore and Bitcoin. Somewhere to make it less associated with drugs.
That may not be possible though.
It's easier to fight back against those miners in Bitcoin though. The anonymous nature on xmr means something like stratum v2 is not possible.
With Bitcoin the bad history is noticed way quicker and whatever addresses benefited from it can be traced with meticulous scrutiny all the way back. Even if they are behind tor or a vpn, their spend and miner reward is public and the bad history could be forked from by users.
With Monero, a low amount double spend attack could go on for months, with everyone accepting the history and without an easy or possible way to go back and check/fork from. Is the rate source and timings of reorgs being tracked by the average operator ? or anyone ?
Mining appears to be profitable because of Bitcoins price increase. It is not profitable solely based on fees as intended. Various forks have actually tried to mess with the fee structure IMHO, with other second layer solutions that do not or try not to pay yhe necessary fees it takes to sustain it beyond price inflation and scarcity cycles. DC would give a sustainable fee environment, something the community actively dislikes based on recent fee increases.
The lack of adoption for other sidechains is directly tied to their design. Is there not demand for zcash ? Ethereum ?
The structure of DC is unique in such a way that the frictions of alternatives do not exist.
The other "sidechain" proposals make tradeoffs in areas that DC does not, at the expense of time. ( instead of final settlement being within the regular network time, as with something that has third party liability like Liquid, DC counts for 6 months in public)
Drivechain supporters claim and can prove that through BIP 300/1 all the demand for anything in crypto outside of Bitcoin, is the demand we would see with nothing but a smooth Op_drivechain between it and Bitcoin.
anti-drivechain advocates will claim this means "we want shitcoins on bitcoin" , but a more accurate statement would be "shitcoins don't exist, only worse and better ideas". Those worse ideas might aswell support the main network and for low cost of a soft fork, we get to implement any good idea that might come along in a safe way. (Zcash sidechain, eth sidechain)
A shitcoin was used to fund it and as a Dao governance token which is a legitimate functioning use case services like Bisq use.
The protocol does not depend on it.
This is basicly how every conversation between a Toxic Maxi and Paul Sztorc or nostr:npub1nevsewvjqhrsmpfcpdqw6v3e9f6z8w9sq0yt8kpndk2cumw8g6hs5mjmve goes.
Name one software that has ever been feature complete. Software only reaches EOL.
Silent payments in Bitcoin, block adjust in BCH... One day we might see the remain POW coins adopt RandomX and Toxics should be very embarrased.
At that point the only just and honest thing to do would be to merge with Monero somehow and reward that project for holding the cypherpunk line.
Someone sends funds to an address only you can accept. Only they know it has been created and funded though.
You scan the network for payments to addresses that could only have been created for you.
When you find one, you check its balance and add it to your wallets balance.
It's like Someone releasing a "message in a bottle" into the ocean with a message in a language only you in the whole world can understand.
Someone else can find the bottle and look at the message but it will be gibberish to them. Only the intended person (you) can read it.
They did it. My joke about adding a new address type to fix Bitcoins problems is coming true. Silent payments.
It's the only way to prolong the welfare state.
You made the claim and have read BIP 300/1, to speak so confidently about it. You're not hand shoveling poop from other miscreants, so, just summerize a scenario. If it's such a likely and intrinsic outcome , it should be quite simple to do.