I urge the community to fund devs to implement new rules that allow us to be "malicious hash resistant". New rules that allow miners to orphan empty blocks, poison blocks, reorgs, etc regardless of the attackers hashrate percentage. We have great assets in BCH ecosystem like Jonald, Chris, ABC team, bitprim, etc. Rather than burning cash at calvin in a war of attrition we have to admit Bitcoin and its vanilla POW Game theory is broken and we need to implement new rules for honest miners to orphan attackers. Incentives wont save us, new client rules to orphan malicious blocks will. Doublespends can be solved later through Preconsensus (avalanche, weak blocks or DS proofs). If we solve other attack vectors, we have solved 90% of the problem. Since doublespends is literal theft, thanks to public statements by craig they would be legally liable and are far less likely steal from exchanges. Please contact and fund your favorite dev. Jonald and ABC are some of the best. P.S. Bitcoin Game theory debunked. Whitepaper claims a rational miner would prefer to mine coins rather than attack since it is unprofitable. This is BLATANTLY false, if you have a monopoly or own a competing currency such as USD, BTC or Wankerkoin, there is a clear profit motive to destroy competing currencies. Additionally, Miners are short term profit seekers, they only have to plan 6 months ahead until a more efficient mining rig is release and 90% of their investment becomes worthless. Spending Millions or billions to secure a monopoly is small price to pay. relevant thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/9wz9xv/guide_for_miners_how_to_deal_with_a_malicious/

  spent 5.0¢
And who decides which blocks are malicious?!
Bitcoin consensus is not broken. It's that we don't have Consensus On Consensus!
   8mo ago