pull down to refresh
100 sats \ 8 replies \ @rothbardllc 16 Nov 2022 \ on: Thoughts on nation-state 51% attacks bitcoin
For sure a legit concern, but we've all experienced the technical competence of governments. Just unrealistic to think any government, with the possible exception of China, could pull off a 51% attack.
The bigger takeaway IMHO is that there will be a time in the not-too-distant future that nation states will be competing to own bitcoin, either by:
-- Mining it themselves, by confiscating asics
-- Confiscating citizen's bitcoin from custodians
-- Printing money to buy on the open market
I think all of the above, at some point. Think of it this way, if you could print money for nothing and use it to buy bitcoin, wouldn't you? They can (for a little while), so they will, eventually, at the tail end of the fiat hyperinflationary collapse ("crack-up boom").
I agree with all those points and also think it's the most likely scenario.
My point was that if at some point the hash rate crashes, a nation-state might have the opportunistic sense to attack bitcoin rather than accumulate it.
reply
Governments can fund private companies to do it for them. It's very naive to think "oh they're stupid so they can't pull it off"
reply
Because they are so good at hiring technical contractors now?
reply
With the right motivation/incentives, they indeed have the power to recruit the brightest minds in the world. One can even argue they already have them.
reply
It would take some 4D level chess to pull anything off at the nation state level, and nuanced strategic thinking and execution is just not a strong suit of governments.
Perhaps a more evolved take is they could make a bungling effort at a 51% attack that doesn't work in any meaningful way (by design) but is enough to destabilize the network -- and the price -- to the point where they could accumulate on the cheap.
However it plays out, I am personally convinced that bitcoin becomes a major geo-political strategic asset at some point and individual ownership is banned "for our protection". This is a looming battle we'll have to resist at some point.
reply
I'm of the opinion that you have a very naive view of the world. The charade that elected governments play may fool you into thinking that it's full of incompetent people, but I'm pretty certain they are able to play complicated 4D level chess at the state level, at least if history is any indicator.
You keep focusing on the simple 51% attack vector, but nobody is stupid enough to attempt something as obvious. These government actors are experts at silently muting, crippling or destroying countries - what makes you think they woulnd't be able to do it to a disorganized open source project?
Whether it'll happen is a different question though -- as you identified, the game theory at the geo-political level complicates any single actor's motivations.
reply
I appreciate the response, and you certainly could be right.
I just have a philosophy that has served me well, which is:
"Never blame conspiracy when stupidity can adequately explain"
This sums up the government and corporate decision making in one sentence, in my experience, and I'll keep with that until proven otherwise.
reply
I definitely agree with that quote in isolation. Not sure it applies everywhere but it is a good principle to apply in general
reply