Ravencoin's token has sunk to a record low after a network exploit put transactions at risk. Mining pools that control most of the network's hash rate are now building a competing chain, a move that could trigger a three-day reorganization of the blockchain.
...
We'll translate:
"Ravencoins token er sunket til et rekordlavt niveau efter et netværksangreb har sat transaktioner i fare. Miningpuljer, der kontrollerer størstedelen af netværkets hash-rate, bygger nu en konkurrerende kæde, et skridt der kan udløse en tre-dages omorganisering af blockchainen."
Note: "exploit" could be "udnyttelse" or "angreb" but in crypto context, often "exploit" is used, but we can say "sikkerhedshul" or "udnyttelse". Let's use "netværksudnyttelse" or "udnyttelse af netværket". But we can say "efter et netværksangreb" but that might imply attack. Better: "efter et sikkerhedshul i netværket" or "efter en udnyttelse af netværket". I'll go with "efter en udnyttelse af netværket" to be precise.
Also "hash rate" is often kept as is, or "hashrate". I'll use "hash-rate" or "hashrate". In Danish, we often say "hashrate" as a loanword.
Next paragraph: The exploit and its fallout
-> Udnyttelsen og dens følger
or "Eksploitten og dens konsekvenser". I'll use "Udnyttelsen og dens konsekvenser".
Then: "The exploit, which has not been publicly detailed, leaves transactions vulnerable. In response, the mining pools that dominate Ravencoin's hash rate have decided they can't trust the current chain. Instead of patching the existing network, they're constructing a separate one from scratch." -> "Udnyttelsen, som ikke er blevet offentligt detaljeret, efterlader transaktioner sårbare. Som reaktion har miningpuljerne, der dominerer Ravencoins hashrate, besluttet, at de ikke kan stole på den nuværende kæde. I stedet for at lappe det eksisterende netværk, konstruerer de et separat fra bunden."
Next: "That decision has rattled traders. The token's price fell to its lowest level ever, though the exact figure wasn't disclosed. The drop reflects a loss of confidence in a network that's now split between those who want to keep the old chain and those who are building the replacement." -> "Den beslutning har rystet handlende. Tokenets pris faldt til sit laveste niveau nogensinde, selvom det nøjagtige tal ikke blev offentliggjort. Faldet afspejler en tillidskrise i et netværk, der nu er splittet mellem dem, der vil beholde den gamle kæde, og dem, der bygger erstatningen."
Next: Why a competing chain
-> Hvorfor en konkurrerende kæde
"The pools behind the competing chain control a majority of Ravencoin's mining power. That gives them the ability to outpace the original chain and eventually overtake it. Their plan is to launch a new chain that excludes the vulnerable transactions, effectively wiping them from the ledger." -> "Puljerne bag den konkurrerende kæde kontrollerer en majoritet af Ravencoins mining-kraft. Det giver dem evnen til at overhale den oprindelige kæde og til sidst overhale den. Deres plan er at lancere en ny kæde, der udelukker de sårbare transaktioner, og dermed effektivt slette dem fra hovedbogen."
"But that comes with a cost. A competing chain with majority hash rate can force a reorganization of the existing blockchain. In Ravencoin's case, that reorganization could go back three days, meaning any transactions confirmed in that window could be reversed." -> "Men det har en pris. En konkurrerende kæde med majoritets-hashrate kan tvinge en omorganisering af den eksisterende blockchain. I Ravencoins tilfælde kunne den omorganisering gå tre dage tilbage, hvilket betyder, at enhver transaktion bekræftet i det vindue kunne blive omvendt."
Next: What a three-day reorg means
-> Hvad en tre-dages omorganisering betyder
"A reorganization of that depth is rare and disruptive. Blocks mined in the last 72 hours would be discarded and replaced with the competing chain's version of history. Payments sent during that period could vanish, and exchanges and wallets would have to reconcile balances against a rewritten ledger." -> "En omorganisering af den dybde er sjælden og forstyrrende. Blokke udvundet i de sidste 72 timer ville blive kasseret og erstattet med den konkurrerende kædes version af historien. Betalinger sendt i den periode kunne forsvinde, og børser og wallets ville skulle afstemme saldi mod en omskrevet hovedbog."
"For users, the risk is immediate. If you received Ravencoin in the past three days, there's no guarantee it will still be there once the competing chain takes over. The pools haven't said exactly when they'll activate the new chain, leaving the network in limbo." -> "For brugere er risikoen umiddelbar. Hvis du har modtaget Ravencoin i de sidste tre dage, er der ingen garanti for, at det stadig er der, når den konkurrerende kæde overtager. Puljerne har ikke sagt præcis, hvornår de vil aktivere den nye kæde, hvilket efterlader netværket i limbo."
Next: The unresolved question
-> Det uafklarede spørgsmål
"The big unknown is whether the competing chain will actually win. The pools control most of the hash rate, but that doesn't guarantee the rest of the network will follow. If some miners stay on the old chain, Ravencoin could split into two separate assets, each claiming the same name." -> "Det store ukendte er, om den konkurrerende kæde faktisk vil vinde. Puljerne kontrollerer størstedelen af hashraten, men det garanterer ikke, at resten af netværket vil følge efter. Hvis nogle minearbejdere bliver på den gamle kæde, kunne Ravencoin splittes i to separate aktiver, hver med krav på samme navn."
"For now, the pools are building. When they flip the switch, the three-day window will close, and the true state of Ravencoin's ledger will be decided. Until then, anyone holding the token is left waiting to see which chain survives." -> "For nu bygger puljerne. Når de slår kontakten om, lukker tre-dages-vinduet, og den sande tilstand af Ravencoins hovedbog vil blive afgjort. Indtil da er alle, der holder tokenet, efterladt ventende på at se, hvilken kæde der overlever."
Now meta description: "Ravencoin's price hits a record low as mining pools build a competing chain after a network exploit, risking a three-day blockchain reorganization." -> Danish: "Ravencoins pris rammer et rekordlavt niveau, mens miningpuljer bygger en konkurrerende kæde efter et netværksangreb, hvilket risikerer en tre-dages blockchain-omorganisering." But we need to be consistent with terms. We used "udnyttelse" for exploit, so maybe "efter en udnyttelse af netværket" or "efter et netværksangreb"? Actually "exploit" is often translated as "udnyttelse" in security context. I'll use
