Is it actually possible for someone to break Bitcoin? University of Oregon associate professor of mathematics and Bitcoin: A Game-Theoretic Analysis author Micah Warren recently joined Grace Remington and Sean Hagan. Together, they examined the security of Bitcoin through the framework of game theory, highlighting why miner incentives serve as a primary pillar supporting the network and why traditional double-spend and reorganization attacks remain improbable.
Chapters:
0:00 – Micah Warren on What Game Theory Reveals About Bitcoin’s Security
1:33 – Why Miner Incentives Hold Bitcoin Together
3:40 – How Treasury Companies, Governments and Miners Change the Game
4:54 – North Korea, Iran and Bad Actors in the Bitcoin Ecosystem
6:18 – AI vs. Bitcoin Mining: When Miners Have Other Options
8:30 – Feather Forks: How a Minority of Miners Could Try to Censor Transactions
12:09 – Could Government Stakes in Miners Raise Censorship Risk?
13:02 – Blacklisted vs. Clean Bitcoin: The Institutional Demand Choke Point
16:19 – How Resilient Is Bitcoin? Rogue Attacks vs. Centralization
17:45 – The Security Budget Debate and Why Miner Collusion Is the Bigger Risk
Frequently Asked Questions
Who is Micah Warren?
Micah Warren is an associate professor of mathematics at the University of Oregon and the author of Bitcoin: A Game-Theoretic Analysis.
What keeps Bitcoin secure according to game theory?
Miner incentives are highlighted as one of the primary mechanisms holding Bitcoin together and maintaining its security.
Are traditional double-spend attacks likely on Bitcoin today?
No, classic reorganization and double-spend attacks are currently considered unlikely.
What topics are covered in the discussion?
The conversation covers miner incentives, AI versus Bitcoin mining, government and treasury company impacts, feather forks, censorship risks, and miner collusion.
