Ok, be mad. A 15 year trend of growth on average no matter how you measure it: market cap, number of nodes, transaction volume, transaction capacity, etc. If you have thought Bitcoin was a scam or a bubble about to burst or whatever, you’ve been wrong 15 years in a row, maybe it’s worth reconsidering. Because it’s not just crypto bros using or investing in it now, it’s national treasures, it’s big banks and finance. But you know, on year 16 you’ll finally be proven correct, right?
Calculating the actual employment rate is complex and it’s plausible the government decided the changing nature of the economy and labor patterns means their current model isn’t accurately reflecting reality.
Obtuse way to say that the category 16-24 olds are studying and not part of the labour force
Landsales: Communists don’t like speculation with real estate and land. Shocker. Not like they’ve been announcing a shift away from real estate to EV/Solar Panels/etc.
Currency Reserves, Bond Transactions, Academic Information, Politicians’ Biographies:
President Xi Jinping’s ideological battle with the US has also motivated Beijing to ringfence data it believes could advantage the Biden administration.
Based.
A 15 year trend of growth on average no matter how you measure it: market cap, number of nodes, transaction volume, transaction capacity, etc.
If you think that’s the critique of bitcoin then you have been blinded by techbros optimizim on the tech. Also it’s funny how you wave away bitcoin using up 1% of global electricity usage lol
Firstly, rich people already do this with our existing currency systems. So that has to be what we’re comparing against. And nobody has done this because there’s zero benefit to doing so.
The thing you’re talking about is a 51% attack and the answer is:
The cost of doing so, which continues to increase and is around a trillion dollars currently. Even if you had the money, there are very significant logistical hurdles which make it difficult and means people would see it coming a mile away. They don’t have to buy coins, they have to buy energy and equipment to turn that energy into mining and they have to keep buying energy as long as they want their attack to continue. That trillion dollar figure is for one block worth of attack (10 minutes). The longer you attack, the more the cost per block goes up too.
There is no benefit to doing so. The second your attack ends, the network reverts to the true “main chain”, the system is designed to be really robust
There are only two things you can do with a 51% attack
“double-spend” meaning you spend the same coins twice. But if somebody is going to trade you 1 trillion dollars of stuff, they’re going to wait for more than a few blocks confirmation. The scenarios where this makes any economic sense for anybody to attempt are basically zero.
Delay (censor) transactions which will go through the second your attack ends
Even if you controlled 51% of the network you cannot:
Spend money you don’t have the key for
Increase the supply beyond 21 million coins
Otherwise make invalid transactions
Because all other nodes would reject your transactions as invalid.
66% doesn’t give you any more ability than 51% does. It doesn’t change the speed, it just increases the cost. There would be no reason to hit 66% to do a 51% attack.
Removed by mod
Except the IMF, World Bank, Moody, Standard and Poor, etc.
lol
They don’t trust it, they just have no other figures to work off. China has a long history of faking numbers or suddenly stopping the publishing of numbers when it can make the party look bad. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-08-16/china-is-hiding-more-and-more-data-from-the-rest-of-the-world
Ok, be mad. A 15 year trend of growth on average no matter how you measure it: market cap, number of nodes, transaction volume, transaction capacity, etc. If you have thought Bitcoin was a scam or a bubble about to burst or whatever, you’ve been wrong 15 years in a row, maybe it’s worth reconsidering. Because it’s not just crypto bros using or investing in it now, it’s national treasures, it’s big banks and finance. But you know, on year 16 you’ll finally be proven correct, right?
Oh, well if the billionaire rag says china is lying, it must be true, for sure
That’s why they publish it. Not like there are (western adaptations of) the Li Keqiang Index
Obtuse way to say that the category 16-24 olds are studying and not part of the labour force
Based.
If you think that’s the critique of bitcoin then you have been blinded by techbros optimizim on the tech. Also it’s funny how you wave away bitcoin using up 1% of global electricity usage lol
yeah but whats stopping rich people from working together to get 60% of the network and then change things as they deem fit?
Firstly, rich people already do this with our existing currency systems. So that has to be what we’re comparing against. And nobody has done this because there’s zero benefit to doing so.
The thing you’re talking about is a 51% attack and the answer is:
There are only two things you can do with a 51% attack
Even if you controlled 51% of the network you cannot:
Because all other nodes would reject your transactions as invalid.
Youre just gonna recreate what we have today with more energy usage. So why not fix the core societal problem?
Doesn’t bitcoins blockchain use some sort of consensus algorithm, so if one party has more than 50% of the compute power they control everything?
Yes, so does a democracy. Answered here in another comment on this thread https://lemmy.ml/post/17799179/12217017
In a democracy one person couldn’t ever have more than 50% of the votes.
51% but thats slower so ideally around 66% so you can make quicker faster changes. but yeah you ll have the same issues with fiat at that point.
66% doesn’t give you any more ability than 51% does. It doesn’t change the speed, it just increases the cost. There would be no reason to hit 66% to do a 51% attack.
They who domiante block mining will dominate the chain. 66% is just an outright majority relatively. 51% vs 49% can be regained with enough luck.