Bitcoin Forum

What they had was a strong guy in charge who could make absolutely sure the development of the company's idea followed the vision. They are highly successful becasue of it.

Bitcoin does not have it.

There is a large group of different people all with different ideas on how to carry out the vision, and no-one to ensure a consistent focus. Running a large-scale operation does not work using consensus. Instead it always leads to disagreement and a failure of the project. So it will be with Bitcoin where the recent civil wars with alt coins is only the beginning.

Is bitcoin a currency? Decentralized? Shoudl it be like the EUro, with one person in charge? An asset? gold has no one in charge.

Gold does not need to develop its underlying code

Bitcoin is not the property of a single company or is it? If it was then that particular business would have the final say in its development.

That is exactly the point - and that is why it will fail because the more money that is involved, the less people involved can agree on its development

thats the whole point of bitcoin, decentralisation. Though now the miners seem to have a say in it.

Etherium has. Vitalik Buterin is a promising guy. I think he will change the industry.

That's kind of the point, for Bitcoin to be decentralized and under no single entities control. If it had a single leader it would become centralized and no different that any of the companies you mentioned. If you like centralization and single person leadership so much, there are already thousands of investment opportunities for you on the stock market, please go there.

One "incognito" guy is far more interesting than some marketing byproducts in human body, lol. I think this personality cult is not healthy tendency anyway.

I do not agree about Tesla. Because Ilon Mask has big expenses in his company. On official websites announced that the money at Tesla will end in mid-2018, if they do not reduce their appetite. There is no money behind the Bitco, it's money itself!

And yet the community withstood those forks, hasn't it? Whether it can scale to meet future demand is uncertain, so far but bitcoin has been more resilient than people give it credit for.

Bitcoin does not need a leader, does not need a face. It is the idea behind it. If you need a face on a currency, you can invest in fiat.

No leader = a ship with no rudder. Eventually it will shipwreck.

I completely disagree with this. We dont have to agree, but we have to respect each other. That is why bitcoin is special, its because it is decentralised. We dont have to have leaders for it to be successful. I will tell you why Bitcoin WILL fail. It will fail because though there is no leader but there is certainly dictatorship attitudes. When you do disagree, you are attacked. It is those toxic attitudes that will make bitcoin fail because there seems to be a silent agreement to never disagree. Thats the kind of attitude i find insane and will steer people away from the community.

You actually explain very well exactly why it is that when there is no strong leader, a business will fail. Bitcoin will fail because of it.

Based on what you have expounded, its true that there are advantages of having on authority driving the direction of innovations and pushing the dream to an achievable length just like the examples of people you mentioned. But what you need to understand is, what is the motive and objectives of those two categories you are making comparison about.

I have read about a guy who was sacked from his job in Apple because he used the new launched Iphone X for recording with his daughter before the release to the public but for bitcoin, the code was even release to the public from the beginning.

I just imagine what will happen if bitcoin success is attached to one person, how powerful that individual will be, even Roger Ver that was lucky to be an early investor still gets credit for the direction of price how much more if someone is running things. I still feel the decentralization of the entire blockchain is all for the better and the dream can still be achieved by everyone collectively.

Why comparing Amazon,Tesla or Apple with BTC which is a digital currency/asset?These are two completely different things and you seem to be forgetting that BTC is so successful just because it is decentralized and there is no that strong guy which you mention.It is always wrong to put all the power in the hands of one man,and Satoshi Nakamoto think on that when he invented BTC.It is more likely to these companies fail and BTC survives.

Bitcoin is not an organization with a CEO and thousands of employees in its payroll. In the future, these people may get have bitcoins as salary and/or incentive.

What I want to say is that bitcoin and all of these are not the same, bitcoin is not physical property, it is the existence of the whole network, is an accounting consensus.

It's amazing to see those big company accept bitcoin !
Bitcoin popularity already grown more than people can expect so it's better to invest bitcoin rather than other well known investation such like gold,diamond


Some company at Filipina already accept bitcoin as salary payment

Because that is what bitcoin was created for, something that no one is controlling. Again it is a decentralized currency that aims to simplify money transfers. Why do we need to have someone to regulate Bitcoin if it the block chain can do it alone.

The issue with this logic is that it's literally contradicting the point in Bitcoin.

Having a leader for Bitcoin is not possible, and I think it only needs a few adjustments to be perfect. The main thing to make Bitcoin grow isn't advancing the technology, it's make people aware.

That is the main idea behind Bitcoin. Decentralization. Are we failing now? There is no "civil wars with altcoins", what wars are we fighting with altcoins? Which altcoins? BCH? That's just some people who wanted to take control over Bitcoin.

Maybe the title should be rephrased to: Amazon has it. Tesla has it. Apple had it. Bitcoin didn't, yet it succeed. The first decentralized system to success — Bitcoin.


Look where we are now. Sure there would be people with different ideas, making branch out of it (i.e. forks), but that's the point. The one with the best ideas and implementation will eventually or keep winning.

Amazon has it. Tesla has it. Apple had it.

They have a product that they sell in exchange of people's money. Bitcoin don't have any product to sell you can even mine it like gold, you get get it from somewhere. Gold had a value without a strong guy to manage it, gold has a value because of it's purpose and use. Same as Bitcoin with a primary goal to be a currency, it will continuously increase it's price once more and more people sees it's value and purpose so we don't need a specific strong guy for it to have a value.

If OP has a problem with this then Bitcoin is clearly not for him.

The lack of a Jeff Bezos or Steve Jobs is aggravating, unsexy, unproductive, expensive, cumbersome and irritating. It's also vital. Satoshi understood this and that's why he's no longer here.

Bitcoin's pretty much the only project with the balls and size to operate this way. Long may it continue. There are hundreds of other coins with someone to cling on to and that's why we're not discussing them.

That's why there are so many hard forks.

You compare total different things. Bitcoin it's not a company like Tesla or Apple. And decentralized means that one person can't be in charge.

Bitcoin does not need a powerful person in charge, so the holders of bitcoin on the network are the person in charge, it is the result of the consensus of the whole network power, as long as the network is in, bitcoin must be in, this is a kind of trust that everyone agrees with.

The whole point of bitcoin is decentralization
meaning there is no single owner of the entire
system nor can control it.

But instead it is run by the people and not even
countries can control it even if they did.
Examples such as China, Russia etc, they all
tried but bitcoin kept on crawling upwards.

The worst possible idea.

You know what
Lehman Brothers, Washington Mutual, WorldCom, General Motors, CIT Group also had in common?

All of them were valued more than the entire BTC market cap and they also had strong people in charge.
Interesting fact that they all went down and filled for bankruptcy.

In 50 years from now people will look back at the ones you mentioned and say... what has apple,amazon,tesla,kodak,compaq and panam in common.
Having a single human in charge of a so called decentralized currency (which obviously won't be decentralized since we have somebody taking decisions) is the bullet proof solution for bitcoin to end up like the ones above.


Checking his profile, and I should have done this first, his problem is Bitcoin.

Foundation or co-operation around bitcoin or any cryptocurrency might only help to pump and dump its price, it will not add anything real value in it. You can't compare amazon, tesla and apple with bitcoin. They manufacture products which they sell to users they are not store of value or anything, bitcoin is better than apple watch or tesla car, there is no need for marketing strategy to sell bitcoin or whatever.

Dude, you have no clue.
Tesla had problems from the start and received $465 million from the government to survive and then the FTC boosted them. They still have no widely accepted vehicles.
The least you could do when making your lame attempt to repeatedly go after Bitcoin is engage your brain before you type.

Do you understand Bit Torrent? Do you understand Linux? Do you understand decentralization at all?

Apparently not?

It's a contradiction in terms, isn't it? Maybe now is the time when the humanity in general needs to learn to accept the idea of decentralization. It is hard because we are more used to having this idea of a strong leader that will get us there. And we are now living in the times of big change. And soon bitcoin will find its way to develop with all the advantages of a leader showing the way without actually the leader  :)

That's what I've been pointing out in every thread he spams this forum with. He's shilling without being overt.

I wouldn't doubt that he's on the take by Ver and company.

He has no replies other than slamming people and agreeing with the 1/20 people who show any signs of alignment with his view.

Roger, is that you????

I agree with this, Tesla, Amazon, and Apple have a leader, while Bitcoin is an only open source, anyone can search and get it ...

What is that one person in charge of the Euro?:D If you mean the EU central bank, it's the issuer, not a person and not in charge.


It actually gives you a choice. If you like being told what to do and like to depend on other people you have so many government issued currencies to choose from. Bitcoin is different, it was made for those who don't like the common financial system and want something without a central authority.
Does gold have a face representing it? Does it have a leader? Yet it's still here. Your understanding of the topic is really limited.

This is just a FUD and masked altcoin/hardfork propaganda. To say that Bitcoin can not succeed because it doesn't have centralized development is the same as saying that open source projects are impossible, and this is obviously wrong, since there are thousands of successful projects that has been around for many years and even decades. It's also a lie that there's some "civil war" going on in Bitcoin community, as big blocks supporters are just tiny minority - it can be proven by the fact that Bitcoin's price remain stable and growing despite all the forks that happened recently, low node count for those forks and the fact that there's very few real users who support forks - most of them are just shills with fresh/farmed/bought accounts.

You talked about companies in your opening post.

Bitcoin is a currency and a system of payment. Satoshi made it fully and truly decentralized, so there's no need of a dictator.
Don't think about Bitcoin as a company or a nation. Think more about Bitcoin as the Internet. Who owns the Internet? Who is the 'strong guy in charge'? Just no one... It's almost 50 years the internet has no leader and yet the Internet is so widely used and still growing all over the world...

Bitcoin is not s one man's property. I believe that is the reason Satoshi stepped out from that position a long time ago.
I agree what really exceptional charismatic and strong leader could make Bitcoin better, but at the same having a central figure is also vulnerability.
Plus, I don't think that it will suit Bitcoin - which is suppose to be decentralized - to have some central figure pulling the strings here.

I think bitcoin can become a lot bigger because it is now reaching a lot of ways to actually become a part of our real live first it was only online then you were able to pay with it at some places and now even the big companies signed bitcoin.

Not enough tinfoil for your hat today Scotty boy?

Clearly you are not capable of logical deduction, but only thinks in terms of "Bitcoin is good" and "Arguments against bitcoin cannot be true and must be driven by a sinister conspiracy".

Yes, yes and yes, but clearly your understanding, Scotty boy, will - at best - be limited to techno issues.

But this is not about technology. This is about economics and social structures where the Bitcoin experiment is already unravelling - Roger Ver is only the beginning of the unravelling, you will see more and more such splintering and more internal civil wars as the techno-types in Bitcoin are increasingly marginalized and the greedy finance types look to cash in on it

Clearly you have no intelligent rebuttal and resort to statements like this every time to everyone's post. Anything you post on here is pure rubbish.

Nope, I understand everything just fine. I most clearly understand your lame crusade to spam the board and get your ass handed to you at every turn. Hey, whatever floats your boat and you're so-called limited time that you're not man enough to address.

The reason for the establishment of bitcoin  for the benefit  of having people expressed or move their where it can be transfer or gain without the intervention of any outside parties some of these usually have a success because not just of their ideas but because they know how to influence a huge group of investors by letting them intervene in their business progress through centralized system in which they know the leader will have access or know what is going in his/her business.

There is no unraveling and BTC's only minor threat is Roger and his minions. I do like how you keep referring to me as "Scott boy"... it means you are "stomping your feet" as you claim others do. That brings me great joy because that is all you have.

But there you have it - just mention Bitcoin Cash and Roger Ver in here and people fly into a frenzy, clearly unravelling

What exactly is it that I have not provided fact for in terms of Bitcoin's issues? Which facts is that you haven't understood Scotty Boy?

That's it, stomp those feet! Now, answer my question about why you lied about your "limited amount of time" and why you don't pontificate in the altcoin forums as well.

People easily brush aside and counter your so-called facts.

maybe btc has "that" guy, who wants to stay anonymous, don't you think about it?

it is precisely the principle of the bitcoin that one is not nobody?

Did the OP create his account just to hate on bitcoin, then his on the wrong forum. His posts are just full of hate and self-righteousness. If you really understand how being decentralized made bitcoin survive and become successful, then you wouldn't make such stupid arguments.

Not liking Roger Ver and his minions has nothing to do with unraveling. Your use of the term unraveling is clearly an overreach and a difference in the application of that term.
People are passionate in their feelings toward Roger and BCH. That is not unraveling.

People are still doing what they're doing with Bitcoin and your threads and posts are not changing it.  ::)

But the idea of bitcoin, quite the opposite, in decentralization, that one person, or even a group of people could not manage it, that's why it became so popular in the society.

Absolutely he did. Fair enough. It is fun to argue with him and also watch others shut him down. He's free to do what he wants and people are free to point out where he's incorrect. He's getting what he wants....stirring the pot. That's what some people do.
I've tried to take it to PM to not clutter up the board, but he won't.

He's just intent on spamming the forum and people can just ignore his threads if they don't like them.

You know that not having any strong leader, could also mean that bitcoin will be stronger than any of those companies. Bitcoin is trying to solve the centralization problem around fiat, and in order to that, it needs to be decentralized. Bitcoin was built for the community and is evolving as a community. If it succeeds the way it is now, it will evolve inside real democracy and team work, and that might end up being it's true strength. If it was centralized it was easy to shut it down. You just needed to go after the one person running it. Since bitcoin doesn't work like that, you can't really shut down it's development, can you?

As for the "wars", you saw what happen with segwit2x. The community proved to be mature enough to solve disagreements for the well being of the network. That was a sign of strength and not weakness.

Mining is the good and the best thing but it is not being happen now because the chance of the bitcoin will help all the people to have the bitcoin, I hope the bitcoin will give me the real price if we will help all the people, I am sure the bitcoin will get the more famous and the bitcoin is now increasing more and more with the high range of the demand so the bitcoin is the most important currency now.

Another sure sign of a price bubble fuelled by blindness. Everytime a market sees a large number of "investors" blindly promoting how a price can only increase - and where facts and rational analysis is blindly dismissed as "hate" - then everytime we always see this end in a spectacular crash

Bitcoin does not belong to any company or individual, but to be made as payment of salary and incentives I think it is very difficult because the price is always changing and not stable ...

Bitcoin may not have those people to manage it but it's price is still going high. Aside from bitcoin is not offering anything to its owner bitcoin is a decentralized currency that don't need anyone to mange it. All of the people who owns it are the manager of the coin and we are our own CEOs.

Bitcoin don't need one person to manage it, it is a decentralized currency and we the users who trust it can prove that it has it's worth. Amazon, Tesla and Apple are companies who are offering products and services and bitcoin is not offering anything to it's users, it is an option.