At least once in your life, visit the Sagrada Família. As you approach, don't look up to it. It's tempting, but wait. Keep walking until you're right in front of it. Then look up. You'll be staring at the most stunning building ever made by human hands: the scale, the intricacy, the stonework.
Go inside. It’s worth it. The light is beautiful, and the architecture rewards unhurried attention. Take your time to wander, don't rush.
One hundred and fifty years in the making, and still unfinished. The two completed façades serve as the "secondary" entrances; the main entrance is yet to be built. Completing the project will require demolishing four city blocks, a plan that is controversial and complicated because people live there. Many of those residents bought at lower prices with a clause acknowledging this; when the Sagrada Família is finished, they will have to leave.
"They" refers to Qubic (by Sergey Ivancheglo), a blockchain network that uses a "Useful Proof-of-Work" system, so it is not built for traditional cryptocurrency mining that solves arbitrary puzzles. Instead, it uses the collective processing power of its miners to train an AI. Qubic's AI-training work is performed by CPUs, same as used by RandomX (Monero's mining algo).
Qubic was able to orchestrate its network of miners to temporarily halt their AI-related tasks and redirect their collective CPU power to mine on the Monero network instead.
Also, Qubic has implemented an economic strategy that involves selling the Monero it mines for a stablecoin like USDT and then using those funds to benefit its own ecosystem and attract more miners, and renting hardware to gain more hash power. The proceeds from the sale of XMR are used to buy Qubic's native token (QUBIC) from exchanges. These purchased tokens are then "burned" or permanently removed from circulation.
A 6 re-org does not mean a '51% attack' was successful. In that case, we'd see unbounded-depth re-orgs/no blocks mined by any other mining pool (assuming the adversary censors other mining pools, as this one does).
It does mean an adversary with a high amount of hash got lucky. I noted there's a discrepancy between their claimed network hashrate and pools' claimed network hash rate.
They may not be including their own hash rate in the network's, in which case they'd need to exceed it. Having 51% would only be 34% of total.
They're an unreliable narrator and I wouldn't trust any data from them. There's insufficient evidence to claim they have 51% of the network's hash power.
https://status.codeberg.org/status/codeberg
https://social.anoxinon.de/@codebergstatus/11647770704799298...