The dogecoin development team has announced that it will soon enable auxiliary proof-of-work (AuxPoW), allowing merge-mining with litecoin that will address concerns over the altcoin’s future.AuxPoW enables the dogecoin block chain to receive work from other scrypt-based networks.Dogecoin miners will still be able to generate blocks and receive DOGE, but now, litecoin miners will contribute hashing power to the dogecoin network.The move, announced on the dogecoin subreddit, follows a months-long period of community debate focusing on the question of long-term viability in the dogecoin network.Litecoin creator Charlie Lee suggested the idea of merge mining in April, eliciting mixed reactions from both sides of the conversation.According to the dogecoin development team, the AuxPoW integration will require a hard fork of the dogecoin block chain.No specific integration date has been given, but the development team said that testing will begin soon.As explained in the original announcement: "Our topmost priority has always been to provide a stable platform for the currency and its services and of course its users.

We hope that with AuxPoW we can achieve that in a better way than what it currently is like.Our hashrate has been on a decline and we hope that we can gain more of it with the acceptance of proof of work from other chains."As expected, community members voiced both enthusiasm and concern for the AuxPoW plan.Yet, advocates for the strategy, including Lee, say that the move will ensure the stability and security of the dogecoin network.AuxPoW is not new – several coins already enable work from other mining networks, with namecoin being the most prominent example.This long-standing reputation as a workable proofing system – and the strength of the litecoin network – has gained the idea support in recent weeks.In a recent community post on /r/dogecoin, Dogetipbot creator Josh Mohland shared his perspective on the concept, saying that AuxPoW would help solve a key problem with dogecoin: the fact that it was never intended to function as a full-fledged transaction network."Dogecoin was built to die quickly – none of us expected it to grow into the absurd entity it is today.

With that said, there's absolutely an easy way to save the coin from its certain death (and by death I mean 51% attacked for the lulz), and that's AuxPoW."He went on to call AuxPoW “a simple change” worth the trouble, owing to the fact that the risk of a 51% attack far outweighs perceived costs.Other community members expressed concern over the idea, saying that the move enables large litecoin pools to crowd out smaller dogecoin miners.Questions were also raised as to whether or not AuxPoW would actually help prevent a 51% attack.Litecoin creator Lee hailed the announcement, telling CoinDesk that the development team made the right decision during a “dire situation”.Lee argued that the move comes at the right time given the long-term threat to the dogecoin network – and, as some have pointed out, its falling price.He added that the move provides increased security for dogecoin without any repercussions, removing a source of concern for the network and enabling broader development in the community.

“[The community] can focus on what dogecoin does best (tipping, donations, wow) instead of worrying about defensive mining and network security.” The leader in blockchain news, CoinDesk is an independent media outlet that strives for the highest journalistic standards and abides by a strict set of editorial policies.bitcoin verify transactionsHave breaking news or a story tip to send to our journalists?bitcoin encrypt walletContact us at [email protected]/* litecoin low price*/!function(t,e,r,n,c,a,p){try{t=document.currentScript||function(){for(t=document.getElementsByTagName('script'),e=t.length;e--;)if(t[e].getAttribute('data-cfhash'))return t[e]}();if(t&&(c=t.previousSibling)){p=t.parentNode;if(a=c.getAttribute('data-cfemail')){for(e='',r='0x'+a.substr(0,2)|0,n=2;a.length-n;n+=2)e+='%'+('0'+('0x'+a.substr(n,2)^r).toString(16)).slice(-2);p.replaceChild(document.createTextNode(decodeURIComponent(e)),c)}p.removeChild(t)}}catch(u){}}()/* ]]> */.bitcoin kurs usd

This came out of some research I put into finding out the probability of a 51% attack for bitcoin.You'd think that mining 6 blocks in a row would be hard to do, even with 50% hashing power, because most people would probably think about a coin flip and how likely it is to flip 6 heads in a row.bitcoin exchange torIntuitively it seems like a hard thing to do but in reality, if you do it enough times, it becomes not only possible, but downright likely, even with a mere 100 coin flips (warning:pdf).cara dapat bitcoinWith bitcoin mining 144 blocks per day a 51% attack with 50% hashing power is just as likely.Even with 35% hashing power it's relatively trivial to pull off.The reason most people probably haven't thought about this before is because the math itself isn't very straitforward., it is a tough question to answer with a simple formula.Thankfully there are computer programs which can do this.

This site has a javascript "streak" calculator that will calculate the odds of a doing a 51% attack.Just put in 1008 trials for a 1 week period (6*24*7), your streak length of 6 blocks, and a probability of .35 for 35% hashing power.The result is about a 70% probability over a 1 week period and a 99.2% chance over a 1 month period.Sense all the legwork had been done solving this problem for bitcoin I thought I'd run the math again for litecoin and what I found is actually quite surprising.Litecoin isn't just more secure than bitcoin, it is orders of magnitude more secure than bitcoin.I figure the reason is in both cases you're trying to "beat the odds" and mine every single block for a 1 hour period but with more "roles of the dice" occuring during that same period of time it's a lot harder to keep up your winning streak with litecoin than it is for bitcoin.While a bitcoin pool with 35% hashing power can reasonably expect to be able to pull off a 51% attack within one week, that same hashing power for litecoin makes it almost impossible, not just for a 1 week period, but for an entire year, even for 100 years!

The numbers here are 4,032 trials per week and 24 blocks in a row.The result is 0.0000029760539%.The same problem over a month and a year is about the same and over 100 years the probability is a mere 0.0155609472527%.At 50% hashing power and 100 years an attacker has a 46.46% chance (6.06% for a 10 year period) but bitcoin hits both those thresholds in under 1 day.At 100 years bitcoin is vulnerable to a miner holding just 8% hashing power, while litecoin remains secure all the way up to 50%.No matter how you run the numbers litecoin remains significantly more secure -- entire worlds more secure -- than bitcoin.With the numbers so dramatically in litecoin's favor one would assume you'd need overall less time to verify a transaction with litecoin than you would with bitcoin.Generally we have assumed it takes 4 litecoin blocks to equal the security of 1 bitcoin block but this has always been a guess.Even the people who run the litecoin-project on github know this isn't true (see bullet #3 on Faster transaction time).