“By definition, a decentralized cryptocurrency should be inclined to 51% assaults whether or not by hashrate, stake, and/or different permissionlessly-acquirable assets. If a crypto cannot be 51% attacked, it’s permissioned and centralized.”
Lee’s assertion was in response to a different tweet stating that “if it will possibly’t be 51% attacked, it isn’t decentralized,” from Twitter consumer CryptoTesla. The tweet was made in response to Coinbase‘s announcement revealing it had detected “chain reorganizations” and double spends on ETC’s blockchain yesterday, Jan. 7.
Coinbase introduced they’d droop deposits and withdrawals of ETC on Jan. 5, with the freeze evidently nonetheless in place by press time.
On Jan. 7, ETC builders denied the reviews that the hashpower consolidation was in truth a 51 % assault, stating that it was “most definitely egocentric mining” and that double spends didn’t happen.
Later, the ETC workforce stated in a tweet that the elevated hashrate is likely to be attributed to the testing of recent 1,400/Mh Ethash machines by application-specific built-in circuit (ASIC) producer Linzhi. Nevertheless, Linzhi Shenzhen’s director of operations denied these claims in a tweet that has since been deleted.
By press time, the ETC workforce has kept away from making use of the time period “51% assault” to the incident. Considered one of their most up-to-date tweets on the problem from immediately repeats a request to all crypto exchanges and mining swimming pools to considerably improve affirmation time on all withdrawals and deposits.