A new Episode: "Kaspa for Dummies": 🚀 Today: Why You Don’t Need to Worry About the Hashrate 💪 In recent months, there’s been a lot of FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) circulating about Kaspa’s hashrate. Claims like: ⚠️ “Kaspa is no longer secure,” ⚠️ “miners are capitulating,” ⚠️ “Kaspa is no longer decentralized.” A lot of nonsense has been spread — ironically, often by people who own one or two ASICs (mining devices). I think for many, it’s simply frustration because, as private individuals, it’s no longer profitable for them to mine when the price is under $0.10. But let’s get real. 🔍 What’s the worst thing that could happen to Kaspa? FUDders always warn about the infamous 51% attack. But what is the 51% attack, actually? 🤔 It means that one person or company controls 51% of Kaspa’s hashrate. That would allow them to control the Kaspa blockDAG. They could theoretically: 💸 mint new Kaspa tokens or, 💥 redirect or reverse transactions. However, this scenario is highly theoretical and practically almost impossible to pull off. 🚫 To help you understand the scale and why a 51% attack is completely pointless and absurd, let’s walk through an example for Kaspa: 👤 Let’s say a fictional person — let’s call him Jeremie — hates Kaspa so much that he wants to destroy it. Because here’s the first important point: a 51% attack only makes sense if you want to ruin a blockchain or blockDAG. What do you think would happen if someone took control over Kaspa or Bitcoin? ✅ Exactly — the token’s value would drop to zero because the chain would be considered failed. Now let’s assume Jeremie currently owns zero ASICs and wants to attack Kaspa: 🔹 He’d have to buy ASICs. The current hashrate of Kaspa is 1 EH (exahash). Grok says that to get 51% of the hashrate, you’d need about 27,000 Antminer KS5 Pro units. Since these currently cost around $2,000 used, Jeremie would need to put at least $54 million on the table. 🔹 There aren’t even 27,000 miners available on the market. Even if he had the money to buy them, he couldn’t get them. 🔹 Some might say: well, he could just rent hashrate. Yes, that’s technically true, but even the companies that rent out hashrate don’t have anywhere near that much power available. You might be able to rent 1% for a lot of money — but that’s it. 🔹 Where is a private individual (no matter how rich) going to store 27,000 devices just to destroy a network? And now the math nerds come in: 📊 Let’s assume Jeremie somehow gets himself 27,000 Antminers and switches them all on. What’s the total hashrate then? ✅ Correct — 1.51 EH. And how much of that does Jeremie control? 0.51 EH! So he still doesn’t have half. This means he wouldn’t need 27,000 devices but 54,000 for a direct attack. Let’s keep it short. 📝 I asked several AIs how much a 51% attack on Kaspa would cost if you don’t own any mining equipment. 💰 The answer from all of them: between $100 million and $500 million. Now, here’s the question for you: ❓ Do you think anyone would spend that kind of money just to ruin Kaspa? ❓ Would large mining farms like Marathon (MARA) even allow that, when they’re making money off Kaspa? The only incentive for a 51% attack would be to harm Kaspa and make the token worthless. Who would throw away that much money just to do that? ✅ Answer: nobody! And this applies to all Proof of Work (PoW) systems. That’s why PoW is so secure compared to Proof of Stake (PoS). With PoS, you only need 51% of the staked tokens — which is often about 15% of the total supply on most PoS chains. And if you look at PoS chains, you’ll often see that the “teams” behind them hold enough tokens to control the chain themselves. That’s why PoS is never truly decentralized — there are often players (usually the developer teams themselves) who could theoretically take control. TL;DR: 🏁 Kaspa is secure, whether it has 1 EH hashrate or 1.5 EH. Don’t let people confuse you who’ve just picked up some buzzwords somewhere. 🚀

3 QTR | @ljwelch7 and @_tyking12_ connect for a 7 yard TD!! 🖥️ es.pn/3t6G0yV 📈 bit.ly/38AVJgm #HatchAttack #AllForSAMford