If a group takes over Bitcoin because of a 51% (Sybil) attack, won't people just fork the Bitcoin blockchain again (like Hive which emerged when Steemit becoming centralized)? 🤔😀
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
If a group takes over Bitcoin because of a 51% (Sybil) attack, won't people just fork the Bitcoin blockchain again (like Hive which emerged when Steemit becoming centralized)? 🤔😀
It happens. There already have been lots of forks from Bitcoin.
Ethereum also had a fork, Ethereum classic. Will there be another one due to the pending EIP? Only time will tell.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I should have put the word "again" beside "fork Bitcoin". 😁
Bitcoin Cash is my preferred cryptocurrency for paying online. 🙂
I don't think that Ethereum Classic is the fork, since it is the original Ethereum blockchain before the fork occurred, hence the name "Classic". 🤓
I stand corrected! 😉
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
With the politics involved, that is possible.
I havent read anything where that is seriously being discussed.
Is that a viable option that some are putting forth? I can imagine the miners are not too happy with the switch to POS.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
They could do that but would it have the same value. There were a number of forks of BTC, and none of them have the value of Bitcoin.
Plus, a fork means basically starting all over again. That is why it is vital to keep expanding these systems. Bitcoin can get more resilient with further decentralization.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
At least, the fact that a blockchain can be forked after it has been successfully taken over (by a Sybil attack) would already deter those who plan to attack it. 🤔
Well they might be able to fork it but I don't know how things would work. It would probably be named something else entirely and no longer be the BTC we know about.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
At least, that is an option worth having that would hinder those who want to attack the blockchain. 🕵️♂️🤔