Leicester

Unless somebody had enough inside information to see that that's happening.

Now, how would somebody have that information?

Let's take a random wild eyed scenario.

Let's say that you had, let's say that Dow, right?

happened to be led by people who happened to be in direct contact with the CEO, getting information from the CEO, or maybe another different random situation.

Maybe that Dow was in communication with the HR person or a community person, somebody who was inside, right?

They're talking to insiders.

What if that exchange of information enabled that route where it enabled them to get access to information,

not because they were trying to do it but they were given that information and it gave them the idea to then overtake the vast majority of nodes so that they could initiate a 51 attack because in their minds they're trying to protect the chain they're trying to protect people they're trying to keep people safe they're trying to they got the best of intentions they're vigilantes

Right.

So that Dow again, and I picked a random state of Wyoming, but it could be any state.

But that Dow, let's say they set up enough nodes to be able to execute a 51 percent attack because they're thinking they're trying to control.

Because they're trying to prevent somebody else whose nodes are in, say, South Africa or Dubai from doing it.

But the point is that the civil attack can impact any project where there is no, we have some form of transparency in terms of who's all the players at the front of it.

I don't know that there's full transparency in any of them with the node level.

I don't know if that's really fully clear.

Some are, but not all.

And even the ones where it is somewhat, you still end up having 51% of tax happened.

Ethereum classic was a great example.

My point is that it can happen to any chain.