51% attacks are usually not what they seem.

Crypto51.app is necessary evil, however they are terrible wrong on certain coins. We have to define what an 51% proof-of-work attack actually is first.

Taken from unblock.net - “An attack on a network of certain cryptocurrency which allows the attacker to create fraudulent transactions, also known as “double spend” transactions. This is possible by means of controlling more than 50% of the network’s hash rate/mining power.” - Well my necessary good vision tells me if I’m able to double spend then the coin is flawed itself, if I’m able to create a longer chain and consensually accepted by most peers, the coin is also flawed.

A regular hash power renter doesn’t have the knowledge to exploit the coin, and this point is quite important, cause he isn’t “attacking” the network, rather investing in it giving it real value. Other important point would be at which point of supply emission the “common” user rents the hash power ( for several reasons, the main one: centralization). For a real attacker to exploit the coin, the coin has to be flawed, is that simple!

Nothing more than common sense.