[ad_1]
Is this concerning?: “Three [pools] sum up to 66.19% of the 1-year global hashrate. One caught filtering transactions.
[ad_2]
View Reddit by MrBones2k – View Source
in Buzz
Is this concerning?: “Three [pools] sum up to 66.19% of the 1-year global hashrate. One caught filtering transactions.
![Is this concerning?: “Three [pools] sum up to 66.19% of the 1-year global hashrate. One caught filtering transactions.](https://bitcoinrealm.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Is-this-concerning-Three-pools-sum-up-to-6619-of-758x569.jpg)
No. The pools may control the hash rate but they do not control the vast majority of the mining equipment. Individual miners do and they have a vested interest in making sure BTC is fair and honest. BTC is game theory at its best.
>Is this concerning?
No.
Here’s why: Those are pools of individuals. Each of those individuals has made a significant investment to be able to mine Bitcoin. They are not going to do anything stupid which would harm Bitcoin because that would hurt them and destroy their investment.
As specific wallet addresses/UTXO’s get successfully blacklisted by major miners, it ups the incentive for other miners to mine those transactions for a higher fee. There will be censorship at the mining level going forward. There will be adaptation by the market regarding that censorship.
Better.
But no still not concerning. Not ideal but not a meaningful threat.
It kinda is, but we don’t know how the individual miners who use these pools think of these decisions so at the same time its kind of not because the pools hashrate now does not indicate what a pools hashrate might be after they make one decision or another.
It’s not a problem because of you don’t agree with it you can redirect your hash rate
at some point there will be a major war / split in bitcoin. this will happen when listed (and some unlisted) mining farms/pools will censor transactions and are not willing to adopt a valid softfork which provides privacy for bitcoiners and the freedom to transact.
old bitcoiners know how this will probably play out but its going to be rough.
———
Stratum V2 is a good idea to improve things.
No. It’s not concerning
Better.
But no still not concerning. Not ideal but not a meaningful threat.
Thanks for changing the title.
Concerning? Not really. If one pool censors a transaction, this transaction will be added by another pool when they mine the next block.
Let’s say the big pools decide to censor. Miners will realize they can earn more fees in the pool that isn’t censoring txs, and within a minute, point the machines to another pool. The big pools lose their customers, earnings, and become small pools.
Yes it’s FUD. Let’s crash this so I can stack more sats on the cheap!!!
At the end of the day, it’s still the nodes that control the network, not the miners. Miners merely provide a service to the network and get paid for it.
Now, if some individual miner would be able to gain more than half of total hash rate they would be able to start some attacks. But that is highly unlikely – and would still not mean that they could do basically everything they wanted. 51% attacks are hard and still limited in their capacity.
Game theory also tells us that they would be extremely stupid doing this. Having 51% of hashing power is a huuuuuuge investment to make. If you spend so much money, you would be best advised to use that hashing power to play by the rules of Bitcoin since you get paid in Bitcoin. If you attack the network, Bitcoin’s price will fall, diminishing your own revenue stream.