📅 Original date posted:2015-07-15
📝 Original message:Have you talk to them? If not, how can you be sure they don’t run large number of standard nodes and actually make the network stronger? Personally I never bring claims like this if I just assume. A lot of people in the community really trust you, do you realize you potentially hurt them for no reason?
btw I do not work for them nor have any money invested in them in case anybody asks
> On Jul 15, 2015, at 8:59 AM, Peter Todd <pete at petertodd.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 08:49:13AM -0700, Me wrote:
>>> Blockcypher's "confidence factor" model(1)
>>> under the hood - yet another one of those sybil attacking network
>>> monitoring things
>>
>>
>> Peter, I noticed on your twitter you have a lot of bad things to say about Blockcypher and their business model (which I might not full agree, but totally respect), can you share any evidence they perform any form of Sybil attack on the network, please.
>
> For Blockcypher to succesfully do what they claim to do they need to
> connect to a large % of nodes on the network; that right there is a
> sybil attack. It's an approach that uses up connection slots for the
> entire network and isn't scalable; if more than a few services were
> doing that the Bitcoin network would become significantly less reliable,
> at some point collapsing entirely.
>
> --
> 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
> 0000000000000000093f699ccdb323aa638af1131249ec2e1bacbf367163807a
Me [ARCHIVE] /
npub1va…4fxz6
2023-06-07 15:42:21
in reply to nevent1q…78ks
Author Public Key
npub1vayr0fsmwx77emk5ez7k8fashnqf8mks9mptamn6e45evhc4wqxsp4fxz6Published at
2023-06-07 15:42:21Event JSON
{
"id": "35215db2ce000b54f5305a61b1d8ed28ae4141f20a4e5d30c484a890c845eb4e",
"pubkey": "674837a61b71bdeceed4c8bd63a7b0bcc093eed02ec2beee7acd69965f15700d",
"created_at": 1686152541,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"8cfdb6ed676e52875cd3360f4e3b9fd8a9125080a56694ae91a3defb5a52e9fc",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"5aec87b6cbd28f39d376359ef18e60e3f08913ace6a9691cbbab604a116d94b0",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"daa2fc676a25e3b5b45644540bcbd1e1168b111427cd0e3cf19c56194fb231aa"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-07-15\n📝 Original message:Have you talk to them? If not, how can you be sure they don’t run large number of standard nodes and actually make the network stronger? Personally I never bring claims like this if I just assume. A lot of people in the community really trust you, do you realize you potentially hurt them for no reason?\n\n\nbtw I do not work for them nor have any money invested in them in case anybody asks\n\n\n\n\n\n\u003e On Jul 15, 2015, at 8:59 AM, Peter Todd \u003cpete at petertodd.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \n\u003e On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 08:49:13AM -0700, Me wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Blockcypher's \"confidence factor\" model(1)\n\u003e\u003e\u003e under the hood - yet another one of those sybil attacking network\n\u003e\u003e\u003e monitoring things\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e\u003e Peter, I noticed on your twitter you have a lot of bad things to say about Blockcypher and their business model (which I might not full agree, but totally respect), can you share any evidence they perform any form of Sybil attack on the network, please. \n\u003e \n\u003e For Blockcypher to succesfully do what they claim to do they need to\n\u003e connect to a large % of nodes on the network; that right there is a\n\u003e sybil attack. It's an approach that uses up connection slots for the\n\u003e entire network and isn't scalable; if more than a few services were\n\u003e doing that the Bitcoin network would become significantly less reliable,\n\u003e at some point collapsing entirely.\n\u003e \n\u003e -- \n\u003e 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org\n\u003e 0000000000000000093f699ccdb323aa638af1131249ec2e1bacbf367163807a",
"sig": "c146bc1c3669fc34c91ead522670793873d7dd269d34517b4f5493f7bdc93dd3320453925a404635dea2ace3334322009ae864a33969db284015c4cf74590269"
}