Exchange providers shut down BSV services as mining pool captures 78% of BSV network hashrate – Bitcoin News

The cryptocurrency community has been discussing the Bitcoinsv network as a mining pool called Taal has well over 51% of the hashrate. Data from analytical crypto website Coin Dance shows that mining pool Taal has dominated over 78% of the network’s hashrate over the past 24 hours. On Tuesday, the European cold store provider Gravity said it had suspended Bitcoin trading “because several large exchanges are deactivating BSV deposits”. [and] Withdrawals. “

After last week’s blockchain reorganization attack, Taal captured well over 51% of the Bitcoinsv network’s hashrate

According to statistics, a mining company called Taal currently controls well over 51% of the Bitcoinsv (BSV) network’s hashrate. As of Wednesday, the Taal mining pool captured more than 78% of the BSV hashrate in terms of distribution across five known pools and 13% of the unknown hashrate. Data from the website shows that Taal commanded 69% of the network’s hash power for the past seven days. Block details show that the vast majority of BSV blocks were found by Taal’s operation.

Exchange providers discontinue BSV services as mining pool captures 78% of BSV network hashrateData from the web portal from July 14, 2021.

In addition to Taal’s Hashpower, the other mining pools that are mining the BSV chain include Viabtc, SBI Crypto,, F2pool and Svpool, at least for today. During the week, other well-known pools such as Solomining, Hathor, and Matter Pool also found BSV blocks. Last week, the Swiss-based global industry organization Bitcoin Association (for BSV) stated that the BSV network had been attacked by a malicious entity.

“A malicious actor recently carried out block reorganization attacks on the Bitcoin SV network,” the Bitcoinsv group stated on July 8th. “[It] appears to be deliberate acts to cover up the illegal double issuance of coins. Bitcoin SV’s infrastructure team has identified one of the addresses associated with the attack that has long been associated with ransomware and other attacks on the BTC, BCH and BSV chains – so the malicious actor is involved in illegal activity, on which BTC and BCH could also be involved, and not just the BSV network, ”added the BSV organization.

Gravity exposes Bitcoinsv trading and 51% declarations of attack

After the attack, the Twitter account @dash_community tweeted that the Bitcoinsv chain should have had protection like Chainlocks, similar to the Dash network. “To prevent harmful block reorganizations like this one, BSV should implement chainlocks that Dash pioneered (but other projects like [Firo] also use), which make reorganizations impossible. Evolve or die, ”the account tweeted last week.

Exchange providers discontinue BSV services as mining pool captures 78% of BSV network hashrateThe conversation about Bitcoinsv (BSV) was a very topical discussion on Twitter.

Following the reorganization issue, reports have indicated that the Huobi and Okex exchanges have suspended withdrawals and deposits for BSV. “Huobi Global [has] deactivated BSV deposits and withdrawals; no warning was given. They fight BSV because they know it’s the real Bitcoin, ”wrote a Bitcoinsv supporter.

On July 13th, the cold store provider Gravity informed its Twitter followers that it was deactivating the BSV trade.

“Urgent message,” tweeted Gravity. “Our liquidity providers have just informed us that due to several large exchanges, the BSV deposits are deactivating [and] Withdrawals also block access to BSV liquidity until further notice. This means that it is currently not possible to trade BSV on Gravity. We sincerely apologize for the short notice announcement [and] will update you with more information when we have it. Trading in all other digital assets on Gravity remains unaffected. “

51% attacks are a trap to see if someone is an idiot and doesn’t understand what a proof of work in Bitcoin is for. If You’re A Stupid Peacock You Can Enjoy The Tiger’s Attention (Law Enforcement)

– BSV KING (@bitcoinkaiser) July 14, 2021

In the meantime, the Coingeek streaming channel, which focuses on reporting on Bitcoinsv (BSV) and the BSV ecosystem, was also discussing the situation. Kurt Wuckert Jr. hosted the show and responded to the criticism that was expressed on the BSV chain. Wuckert Jr. made similar statements on Twitter the day before.

“51% attacks do not really exist without the exchange-based Bitcoin economy,” tweeted Wuckert Jr .. Huobi [and] Okex has stopped withdrawals / deposits but they will be back. Honest nodes reject malicious blocks and further attempts are wasted. Things will soon go back to normal, ”he added.

Bitcoiner Theo Goodman commented on the 51% attack discussion that came from the Coingeek streaming channel video, not impressed by the host’s explanation of the events. When someone tweeted, “Look at this, Kurt explains what happens at the beginning,” Goodman responded to the video content.

“He explains it, but then adds an opinion,” wrote Goodman. “There is no 51% attack” and from 9:14 onwards he contradicts himself about trust. Then later he [basically] Says not to worry unless you are in the infrastructure, they will find out. “

What do you think of the discussions surrounding the Bitcoinsv network? Let us know what you think on this matter in the comments below.

Tags in this story

51%, 51% attack, Bitcoinsv, Blockchain reorganization, BSV, Calvin Ayre, Chainlocks, Coingeek Streaming Channel, Dash, Gravity, Hashpower, Hashrate, Huobi, Kurt Wuckert Jr., Liquidity, malicious actor, Okex, reorganizations, Taal, Taal Pool, Theo Goodman

Photo credit: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons, Coin Dance, Twitter,

Disclaimer of liability: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not a direct offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, or a recommendation or endorsement for any product, service, or company. does not provide investment, tax, legal, or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author are directly or indirectly responsible for any damage or loss caused or allegedly caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.

Comments are closed.