Qubic Says Dogecoin Mining Build Is Underway, Revives 51% Attack Fears

bitcoinistPublicado em 2026-01-23Última atualização em 2026-01-23

Resumo

Qubic has announced the development of a Dogecoin mining integration after a community vote selected DOGE. This move transitions the project from its previous "attention" narrative around Monero into implementation, raising renewed concerns about 51% attacks. Qubic emphasized that integrating ASIC hardware into its useful Proof-of-Work (uPoW) model requires significant engineering and protocol work, but could bring scale by incorporating Dogecoin's large mining economy. The announcement revisits security debates sparked in August 2025 when Qubic claimed a Monero "takeover demonstration" with over 51% hashrate dominance, though subsequent research found its control peaked at 23–34%. Unlike Monero's CPU-based mining, Dogecoin uses Scrypt and has merged mining with Litecoin, making a brute-force 51% attack economically challenging. Research firm 21Shares estimated it would cost billions in hardware and millions daily in electricity. A more plausible risk is Qubic incentivizing existing Scrypt miners to redirect hashpower through its system—a "vampire mining" approach.

Qubic says it is now building a Dogecoin mining integration, a step that moves the project’s post-Monero “attention” narrative into an implementation phase and reopens a familiar set of security questions around majority-hashrate risk.

In an X post shared Thursday, Qubic wrote: “The community didn’t hesitate. The vote was decisive: DOGE won with 301 votes. This isn’t a plug-and-play upgrade. Integrating ASIC hardware into uPoW requires real engineering, deep protocol work, and time to do it right. But the upside is significant. DOGE represents one of the largest and most established mining economies in crypto. Bringing it into Qubic’s useful Proof-of-Work model extends uPoW beyond theory, into scale. [...] Development is underway. This is just the beginning of what is to come.”

Could Dogecoin Suffer A 51% Attack?

The announcement lands with baggage. In August 2025, Qubic ran what it publicly described as a Monero “takeover demonstration,” claiming it had achieved “over 51% hashrate dominance” during parts of the experiment and reporting a brief chain disruption that included a six-block reorganization and orphaned blocks.
That episode became a lightning rod for the broader PoW security debate: how quickly external incentives can concentrate hashpower, and how markets react when “51%” enters the conversation.

Subsequent research challenged the strongest interpretation of those claims. A December 2025 paper reconstructing Qubic-attributed activity on Monero describes the operation as an advertised “selfish mining campaign,” finding Qubic’s hashrate share rising into the 23–34% range in detected intervals, while “sustained 51% control is never observed.”

Dogecoin’s mining economy is structurally unlike Monero’s CPU-oriented RandomX landscape. Dogecoin uses Scrypt and has, since 2014, supported merged mining alongside Litecoin, an architecture that has historically helped bolster its security budget by tapping into a broader Scrypt ASIC miner base.

That hardware reality is central to Qubic’s own messaging. The project said “integrating ASIC hardware into uPoW requires real engineering, deep protocol work, and time to do it right,” explicitly acknowledging that this is not a simple pool launch.

It is also where most of the immediate 51% attack fears run into friction. In an August 2025 research note, published when Qubic first began floating Dogecoin as the “next” network after Monero, 21Shares argued that a brute-force Dogecoin majority would be economically prohibitive, estimating that Qubic would need to match and then exceed roughly 2.78 PH/s, implying about $2.85 billion in hardware plus roughly $2.5 million per day in electricity (before logistics).

The more plausible risk vector, if any, is not Qubic buying its way to majority hashrate, but whether it can engineer incentives and integrations that convince existing Scrypt ASIC operators to route meaningful hashpower through a Qubic-mediated setup, an approach 21Shares characterized as “vampire mining.”

At press time, DOGE traded at $0.12521.

DOGE price, 1-week chart | Source: DOGEUSDT on TradingView.com

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhat is Qubic currently building and which cryptocurrency does it involve?

AQubic is currently building a Dogecoin mining integration.

QWhat security concern is reignited by Qubic's announcement of Dogecoin mining integration?

AThe announcement reignites fears of a potential 51% attack on the Dogecoin network.

QWhat was the outcome of Qubic's previous 'takeover demonstration' on the Monero network according to subsequent research?

ASubsequent research found that Qubic's hashrate share on Monero reached 23-34% in detected intervals, but sustained 51% control was never observed, challenging the strongest claims of the demonstration.

QWhy does 21Shares argue that a brute-force 51% attack on Dogecoin would be economically prohibitive for Qubic?

A21Shares argued it would be economically prohibitive because Qubic would need to acquire roughly $2.85 billion in hardware and spend about $2.5 million per day on electricity to match the required hashrate.

QWhat is the more plausible risk vector for a Dogecoin 51% attack, as opposed to a brute-force approach?

AThe more plausible risk vector is not a brute-force purchase of hardware, but rather Qubic engineering incentives to convince existing Scrypt ASIC operators to route their hashpower through a Qubic-mediated setup, an approach termed 'vampire mining'.

Leituras Relacionadas

Jensen Huang's CMU Speech: In the AI Era, Don't Just Watch, Build

Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA and a first-generation immigrant, delivered the commencement address to Carnegie Mellon University's class of 2026. He shared his personal journey from a humble background to founding NVIDIA, emphasizing resilience, learning from failure, and the responsibility that comes with leadership. Huang framed the present moment as the dawn of the AI revolution, a shift he believes is more profound than previous computing waves. He described AI as fundamentally resetting computing—moving from human-written software to machines that understand, reason, and use tools. This will create a new industry for generating intelligence and transform every sector. While acknowledging AI's potential to automate tasks and displace some jobs, Huang distinguished between the *tasks* of a job and its core *purpose*. He argued AI will augment human capability, not replace humans. The real risk, he stated, is not AI itself, but people being left behind by those who effectively use AI. He presented AI as a generational opportunity for massive infrastructure investment—in chip factories, data centers, energy grids, and advanced manufacturing—that could re-industrialize nations like the U.S. and bridge the digital divide by making computing and intelligent tools accessible to all. Huang called for a balanced approach: advancing AI safely and responsibly, establishing prudent policies, ensuring broad access, and encouraging universal participation. He urged the graduates not to fear the future but to engage with optimism and ambition, reminding them of CMU's motto, "My heart is in the work." His core message was clear: this is their moment to actively build and shape the AI-powered future, not merely observe it.

marsbitHá 17m

Jensen Huang's CMU Speech: In the AI Era, Don't Just Watch, Build

marsbitHá 17m

The Era Has Arrived Where Human Writers Must Prove They Are Not Machines

The article describes an era where AI-generated content is flooding the market, forcing human authors to prove they are not machines. It begins with the example of dozens of AI-written, error-ridden biographies of Henry Kissinger appearing on Amazon within hours of his death, a pattern repeated for other deceased celebrities and even living experts who find fraudulent books under their names. This spam content has exploded, with monthly new book releases on platforms like Amazon reaching 300,000 by late 2025. The issue spans genres, from suspiciously high proportions of AI-written teen romance and self-help books to dangerous, AI-generated foraging guides containing lethal advice. The platforms' automated review systems, designed to catch plagiarism and banned words, are ill-equipped to detect AI-generated text that avoids these pitfalls while being nonsensical or fraudulent. The problem has infiltrated traditional publishing. A major publisher, Hachette, had to recall a bestselling horror novel after AI detection tools suggested 78% of its content was machine-generated. An acclaimed European philosophy book was later revealed to be entirely written by AI under a fake author persona. In response, authors are fighting back. At the 2026 London Book Fair, 10,000 writers published a blank book titled "Don't Steal This Book" containing only their signatures—using emptiness as a protest weapon in an age of AI overproduction. Initiatives like the "Human Author Certification" program have emerged, ironically placing the burden on humans to prove their work is not machine-made. The article warns of a vicious cycle: AI-generated low-quality books pollute the data used to train future AI models, leading to "model collapse" and an ever-worsening flood of digital waste, eroding trust in publishing and devaluing human creativity.

marsbitHá 42m

The Era Has Arrived Where Human Writers Must Prove They Are Not Machines

marsbitHá 42m

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片