Status as of Wednesday, December 6, 2017

Discussion of development releases of Prohashing / Requests for features
Forum rules
The Development forum is for discussion of development releases of Prohashing and for feedback on the site, requests for features, etc.

While we can't promise we will be able to implement every feature request, we will give them each due consideration and do our best with the resources and staffing we have available.

For the full list of PROHASHING forums rules, please visit https://prohashing.com/help/prohashing- ... rms-forums.
pavvappav
Posts: 59
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2017 10:19 am

Re: Status as of Wednesday, December 6, 2017

Post by pavvappav » Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:23 pm

I'm with Steve on defending the coins. Putting the politics of Bitconnectcoin aside, I think its good community politics to defend a profitable coin from attacks. Sacrificing shot-term profits for a greater long-term profit and healthier ecosystem should be in every miners interest, professional or hobbyist.

No password argument should be necessary. People vote with their hash power. If people use the service, they are part of the community. If the option is given to benefit off of the sacrifice of other miners without risk of loss, then a rational actor will vote to let others take the hit. It is the tragedy of the commons.

Going even further, it may be of some benefit to have other pools agree to come to the defense of a 51% attack to further deter a malicious actor. It would require the operators of multiple pools to collude together to rally a response.
Post Reply