/biz/ - Business & Finance

More like Teeka BTFO. Dude is a joke who got lucky during a ridiculous bullrun and got Antshares and Monero right. Selling because of the 51% attack is so shortsighted, especially since he surely suggested investing in this because it was going to be a top privacy platform. In 3 months no one is going to care about the 51% attack except the hacker who can now set up 46 Supernodes and retire.

>>9901022
>cope
nigger if it wasnt for that pajeet this dogshit coin would be still at 8$. admit its over and gtfo

>>9901022
But nothing changed. They could do another 51% attack tomorrow. They could be doing one right now even.

>>9900984

wow, a pajeet pushing 2$k/year shill newsletters can't differentiate between a double spend and a chain exploit.
Meanwhile GBTC; 2.2b$ heavy, creates a ZenCash investment trust for accredited investors only.
Minimum income: 200k, minimum investment size: 1$ mil. I guess ZEN really did get BTFO

Oh and wait, what's that?

A proposal to fix the 51% attack vector for each and every PoW coin.

> https://news.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-in-brief-halting-51-attacks-and-where-now-for-ripple/

> The Grayscale news helped the price of ZEN soar, but the more important story was the new whitepaper the team released on Thursday, which has implications for all Proof of Work coins. In the document, Zencash propose changing Satoshi Consensus, also known as the longest chain rule, to a method that makes it “both technically infeasible and economically disastrous to attempt double spending”. ZEN aims to achieve this by introducing a penalty “in the form of a block acceptance delay in the amount of time the block has been hidden from the public network”. The team now hopes that other PoW coins will adopt this proposal with a view to mitigating further 51% attacks.

I am quite sure this shitcoin is dead. kek
Oh wait, here's Charles chiming in:

https://twitter.com/iohk_charles/status/980098748993826816?lang=en

Yep, still dead shit coin.

oh.....is that IOHK using ZenCash as testbed for Cardano governance?

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXez338kg-8

Right...BTFO'd

You know it's time to buy when this shithole starts to FUD something.

>>9900984
Teeka was wrong, new coins didn't get created. An exchange was stolen from.
Pretty worthless to listen to him if he doesn't even understand that.
I bought before PBC and bought after their dump recommendation. I don't need some bald nontechnical normie telling me how he created tax events for very little gain.

>>9900984
>OP sees 2 ZEN threads on /biz/
>oy vey the goyim are buying
>decides to post some pajeet sourced FUD from 10 days ago
>designated_shitting_street.jpg

>>9901248
I dont see why a hacker couldnt just mine publicly, but intentionally keep the malicious chain 1 block below the honest chain. The hacker performs the double spend, the exchange accepts it and the hacker cashes out in monero really quick. Then he increases his hashrate on the malicious chain to full power. He quickly overtakes the honest chain because he controls over 51% of the network. The exchange is forced to switch to the malicious chain and he rides off into the sunset with a free stack of monero.

The white paper says "everyone can see the fork and are able to take preventive measures." No one is going to write special observer code for every single shitcoin on their exchange.

>>9901282
This. They are stolen, not created. What a brainlet.

>>9901417
No it will be entire teams of developers applying patches from whatever base coin they are forked from. Or they will switch to POS/dpos/another platform through a coinswap.

>>9901417
> No one is going to write special observer code for every single shitcoin on their exchange.

ZenCash did have a "special observer" in place as an early warning method. It's detailed in their last bi-weekly I believe. Their team was pretty quick to respond to the attack and also approach exchanges. At the time of the attack Binance only required 12 confirmations, while Bittrex needed 120. No excuse for what happened, but still noteworthy that they did everything they could and try to prevent the coins from being spend.

> dont see why a hacker couldnt just mine publicly, but intentionally keep the malicious chain 1 block below the honest chain.

Honestly, I don't know. The criticism is appreciated. I'll familiarize myself a little on the issue but I figure its a whole lot better than the current consensus in terms of combating 51% attacks. And it wasn't a "hacker", it was a entity with enough hashpower, which could be anyone with enough money.