Bitcoin Forum

I'm not saying I have lost any faith but it is lost its touch since I was introduced in 09 if anything it has become monopolized.

What is killing the bitcoin are the multi-million dollar data-centers dedicated to mining, little to no acceptance as an alternative payment method, nearly impossible to keep up with difficulty increases, and limited peer to peer exchanges.

Tell me otherwise?

Why are the mining centers killing it? More and more merchants are accpeting btc daily, you just need patience. It's going to be a slow process.

The volatility is killing it - small deviations are fine but not the huge drops and rises we see every few months

I've done my fair share in spreading this anywhere in all local shops explaining benefits, no charge back risks little to no fees. Its been 7 years now and I've yet to see a single store in my area to accept bitcoins for something as simple as a doughnut. I understand slow process but where is the decentralization or hardware that is worth purchasing? What makes bitcoin decentralized anymore?

And these huge drops and rises who or what is causing it other then media?

TBH I think the "Bitcoin Theives" - the people that stole from Gox, Silk Road etc. With such a large amount stolen they are offloading the coins fast and shorting the price.

I have the same problems with BTC. That's why I am mainly out of PoW coins and almost fully in PoS coins.

Without volatility = 90% of traders would not be interested in it.

You can't get huge leverage on bitcoin like with forex, so bitcoin gets its liquidity from volatility. Without volatility it would be even more illiquid.

This is like complaining that professional gold miners are centralizing gold too much, what about us pan miners?? lol.

Has it? My time machine must be acting up again.

"I no longer consider bitcoin as a decentralized currency"

A problem with decentralized currencies is indeed that they are not really decentralized right now. :)

too many 3rd parties companies are in this world.
But we can still use our bitcoins as a decentralized currency - it mostly depends on how we earn btc, and how we spend them.
IMO.

ok then give me your btc and run along then!

Some people just have more money to invest into mining it. This was expected. It is still a decentralized currency.

You mention doughnuts. That's fine, as doughnuts are tasty and ubiquitous, but is that really what bitcoin is best designed for, namely, small real-world transactions? Bitcoin can indeed handle small real-world transactions, but it instead really shines as a global remittance system that puts SWIFT to shame, or as a secure-way to purchase high-end goods globally.

the selfishness of miners will be one of the biggest issues for bitcoins.

Maybe the richest and smartest people trying to "squeeze out the most juice" of bitcoin and maybe they really effect the price somehow and the price is bouncing but I hope It wont last forever... 

Interesting topic. Yeah it isn't even remotely de-centralized since there are a few juggernauts who control the vast majority of coins. Likewise for more altcoins. Some coins *cough* blackcoin *cough* even have shadowy groups of holders who make backroom agreements not to sell below X price. And yes, the major investors and farm-builders have effectively taken BTC out of the hands of the individual.

I'd rather have my transactions secured by temperature-controlled, dedicated ASIC farms than by bots, over-heating laptops, and dysfunctional youth installing backdoor cpu miners on their parents' PCs because they're jealous of the early adopters. Move on. The early, wild west days of bitcoin are over. They were glorious and thrilling. But looking forward towards innovation and merchant adoption should be a priority, not decrying that the way things are now isn't the way you think they ought to be.

If you are incapable or not inclined to help bitcoin grow with its merchant adoption and are determined to stay focused on the mining aspect, then support p2pool any way you can.

ASICs are not intrinsically good or bad, yet they are inevitable beyond a certain threshold of success that bitcoin crossed a long time ago. Centralized mining is indeed problematic, but ASICs do not cause it. During the CPU, GPU, and FPGA days of bitcoin mining, the network was more vulnerable to attack than it is now. 51% attacks loomed far more frequently then than they do now.

Like most security vulnerabilities, it's human nature, hubris, and greed that's the weakest link, not the actual tech itself.

Bitcoin is a level playing field, but it is not a giveaway. You could also have taken the risk of starting your own data center. There is nothing unfair about it. Those who go big face greater risk but may realize greater profit. If you don't like the idea of true competition we could fork the chain and say all miners must buy a permit that rations the hashing power of the network. Is that a better idea? I don't think so.
Our current system does not care who you are, only what resources you bring to the network. The more you work and invest in equiptment the more you are likely to be successfull. This was an issue when CPU mining went away. Some people argued that it woud "kill" bitcoin because only rich kids with fancy gaming PCs would be profitable.

For me the bottom line is that bitcoin is a logical payment system, not a get rich quick scheme. The honey badger does not give a shit about us and our ambitions. It seeks only to grow stronger

Yet the important few keep switching to prevent one of the pools to reach 40% or more of the hashrate. (I do think that some have hit that percentage for a short amount of time)

I think some of you guys are missing the point here. The bottom line is that pretty soon a lot of miners are liable to just give up and sell their equipment off and we will be left with a handful of massive datacenters doing all of the mining. So instead of hundreds of thousands or even millions of individuals all around the globe mining, you will have consolidation occurring until perhaps a few hundred companies with massive datacenters/farms are doing all of the mining. How will that be any different from banks, visa/MC, etc?

I will never stop mining, even if I'm at a small loss. I'm doing this to support the network, not to gain profit.

Nothing is "killing" Bitcoin, OP is either misinformed or trolling.

https://i.imgur.com/RDPz54G.gif

Look at Bitcoin fiat's exchange value on a logarithmic scale spanning 3+ years, and you will see it's doing remarkably well.

https://i.imgur.com/b8BpN3g.jpg

I see a huge difference. It's your choice not to mine. You do not have the option of offering banking services. Consolidation can only happen in bitcoin if we choose not to compete. Consolidation in the banking industry is something we can't do a damn thing about.

Bitcoin mining is a market that has almost no barrier to entry and as such the most efficient will win. That could be anyone willing to work hard and invest in infrastructure.

Really, no barrier to entry? Last I checked it was basically impossible to even clear ROI on any kind of bitcoin mining equipment unless you start talking about spending 5-6 figures and even then it's doubtful.

it is decentralized not in the sense that every node is equal but that every node has equal opportunity. A bit like the internet itself. The free market leads to a power-law type distribution of  node importance.

i think we need to realise that bitcoin is now more tan just people mining them and selling them or trading them for goods. alot of people actually do use bitcoin as a currency

couldn't have said it better.

and difficulty raise ...
and business plan on professional data center crash ...

and people that mining with little system stay ...


i love bitcoin.  ;)

https://bitcoinwisdom.com/bitcoin/difficulty

Well, yes money is a barrier. But it is open to anyone willing and able to spend. That has always existed. When CPU mining was still going on it took a decent computer. That precluded entry to many/most? people on the planet.
But try starting a bank or even buying an ATM. Then you will see the product of decades of unholy laws and regulation that do nothing except secure the entrenched powers of big banks.

Everyone talks about centralization, but I say the rules of the game are the same for big players too, and I don't see anyone prevailing. The only difference is that regular user of Bitcoin will have to buy it, not mine it, but it's irellevant to me actually.

you understand, but too late.

http://img845.imageshack.us/img845/6955/hw2y.jpg (http://img845.imageshack.us/i/hw2y.jpg/)View Screen Capture (http://img845.imageshack.us/i/hw2y.jpg/)

What if there was no way to get into mining or only a limited number of people were allowed to mine?
Mining bitcoin is an investment. Investments usually aren't under 4-5 figures.

Thank you lol, I'm so sick of everyone posting the same picture of Bitcoin's growth from the last few years as though it is somehow evidence that it will go up forever. We have been losing ground for a solid 5 months or so now.

I do not know of too many businesses where you can buy hardware for $500 and have a payback within six months.  There is hardware out there that is profitable now if you know where to look.  The barrier to entry is quite low. 

I don't like ASICs yet I own them.  For a while in December things looked bad as huge farms gobbled everything up and small miners could not really buy anything good.  But now there are two players out there selling ASICs freely and honestly and their customers (many just little guys) are now more then 20% of the hashrate.  That combined with the fact that the BIG FARMS are not one but really several totally unconnected businesses so the hashrate is actually MORE decentralized than it was in December.

No one is giving you super easy profits anymore, sorry.  Mining is now hard but that does not make it centralized. 

time was never better for it.

I definitely hear what you are saying...it feels like we are stepping into a completely different era for bitcoin.  It has moved from its libertarian type crowd, to a much more corporate era.   It is a double edged sword, because if we all want prices to rise, then we need corporate America (and rest of world) getting involved.  While that happens, it steers away from what a good amount of people want bitcoin to stand for.

Mining is being attacked and the OP makes some good points.  But Mining has been hard for the average person to get into for a good while.  I think it is a bit of an overstatement to say Bitcoin is now decentralized but I like seeing the topic being discussed.

So you're saying that it is now centralized?

There's nothing you can really do about that. We're just going to hope it can settle eventually, but I'm not sure it ever will.

Volatility will only settle if there will be better coin distribution (eg. big holders selling). It's completely natural at this point.

@OP: Bitcoin is far from centralized. There are a lot of mining companies and small time miners as well, not to mention the distribution of full nodes.

I do not know of anything out there that can be purchased for $500 and used to mine bitcoin, that will break even let alone provide ROI in six months.

This is one of the reasons I don't see decentralized anymore. I do my part to let every business owner know about BTC, costs nothing to start accepting no chargebacks and little fees. I've let everyone from my local doughnut shop to gun dealers I even offer free help to get them setup and started as well as free advertising.

In my eyes anymore there is nothing decentralized about bitcoin anymore. Out of everyone who replied I still haven't seen anything that proves otherwise.

You have huge data centers seen here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CjldZLXiAU) and cloud hashing data centers like cex.io (http://cex.io) or the hardware manufacturers that only ship out the hardware that YOU pre-ordered which those funds were more then likely used to pay for development, production then "tested" for a few months prior to shipping.

How about an exchange funded by the bitcoiners. I've been a self employed and a entrepreneur for 8 years now who can say with confidence my success was because of my honesty which in the online world of commerce is hard to find. I only know a few who haven't been taken over by greed.

What bitcoin needs is less greed and more open source. How about a open source ASIC chip not funded by a pre-order that you own no rights to or even considered a share holder. I would love to setup a project like this and confident it would be successful but who else here is on the same page as I am? I still have faith in bitcoin for the simple fact that it puts faith in the merchant. Back to the subject I'm waiting for someone to tell me what is decentralized about BTC anymore.

I actually tend to agree with you, Maidak.

I totally agree with the OP. What amazes me (and annoys me) is some people even trying to deny the obvious. If the latest high-end ASIC's were readily available for anyone to buy like CPU's and graphics cards are, then OK, I'd swallow the argument that people with more money to invest could buy more ASIC's and then profit more because they invested more. The thing is, they aren't available. How many people got scammed and lost money with the Butterfly Labs (and probably other companies) pre-orders? If it were up to me, I'd change the mining algorithm to something ASIC-hostile and fork Bitcoin. Since this is unlikely to happen, I'll be rooting for other coins to grow popular enough to take bitcoin's place.

I love bitcoin and think it is a great idea whose time has come, buuuuuuut the exact set up of bitcoin was off I think.  It has a huge mining problem.  If things keep on going like they are, the only miners will be a few huge megacorporations that make their own in house miners and everyone else will be out of the game.  We need a real CPU mined coin that can't be abused by GPUs or ASICS.  Maybe something that can't even be pooled. 

Thanks i'm not bashing or trying to bring negativity. I'm trying to get a point across that this is suppose to be considered a global currency and that in order for it to succeed we need a change. I understand you need some sort of profit in order to survive but it doesn't need to be outrageous profit margins. What I see happening right before my eyes is the same statistic here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_United_States) but with bitcoin. What everyone does is looks the other way.

I've pitched ideas like offering car insurance that can be paid with bitcoin to gauge interest but not enough support to really make it happen. When I first looked at bitcoin I didn't just see a great idea I seen the first step towards what we really need and you all know what I am talking about.

Nope, you are correct.

Those who seek "universal acceptance" of bitcoin done messed it up.

Time to move on.

My $.02.

;)

You are totally right, today the mining is handled only by a few mining networks, that should not suppose a problem as long those networks are not able to falsify BTC (at least I think so, but... Is it possible for a mining pool to validate fake transactions?). On the other hand there is another problem related with that: The Rogue pools (http://"http://blog.malwarebytes.org/cyber-crime/2013/11/bitcoins-pools-and-thieves/").

Pools that only think in money, what will happen in 2050 by the time when the maximum BTC will be reached? If there is no profit for validating a transaction. Why would a miner spend his computing power (with all its related costs) for nothing?

2050 isn't the ending year for Bitcoin. The estimate is 2140, although I think that it might come up to 5-10 years earlier than that.
After that the miners will be earning the fees that is it. Let the people of the 22nd century worry about that.

Stop posting and start reading noob, so much BS in one post.

you are right,

see why Bitcoin is centralized, why Nxt - pure proof of stake - is decentralized: http://nxter.org/nxt-solutions-financial-decentralization-financial-freedom/

From the moment I heard about bitcoin, until now, I always said the same: I'll invest in it and start to use it as soon as my local bakery is accepting bitcoins in exchange for bread.  That's about it, you want acceptance and real use for any currency, then the local store needs to accept it, and these stores will only do so when they can pay their suppliers with it (or easily transfer to fiat money).
This last part will be the show-stopper in my opinion... You can have ATM machines, exchanges, brokers, miners all you want, as long as you're not able to walk around in any city in either Europe, Asia, US, Africa ... and pay in the locals stores with bitcoin, then there's no use of all these mining rigs, start-up companies and venture capitalists who try to secure their place. 
The main thing they're usually forgetting is getting the local shops and their manufactureres / suppliers to accept it and embrace it. 
If bitcoin is able to overcome this hurdle it will truly go through the moon :)  - and back.

Until that happens, we have to use excellent companies like gyft and bitpay to enable bitcoin adopters to be able to use their bitcoins in more places. If, as a community, we continue to reward companies that have helped move bitcoin forward (overstock, tigerdirect, amazon) and avoid companies that do not (newegg) then we're exerting influence in the marketplace where it actually counts. Fiat shackles will not be broken overnight imo, they'll be broken one tiny piece at a time.

If everybody bashes on Walmart for retracting their gyft support then maybe they'll realize they made a mistake. Stranger things have happened.

So much BS. Mining never was a surely profitable endeavour.

I'm mining since the GPU days and If I had sold the generated BTC immediately (or too soon) I wouldn't have been able to turn a profit.

It was like this soon after GPU mining started.

I'm not sure why the whining (especially from a long time member) it seems quite idiotic to me.

It was never surely profitable yes, but if you believed in the whole crypto world you would have made a lot of money. Remember those miners who were mining LTC and could barely pay off the electricity when LTC was around $1-2? Whoever kept those LTC and paid the electricity using fiat profited a lot. LTC later on jumped to $30-40 or more (I'm not sure about the exact numbers).

Did you even read the OP? Because to me it doesn't sound like you did. Maidak ain't complaining about the profitability of mining - he's arguing that Bitcoin is becoming increasingly centralised as a result of large mining conglomerates and that merchant acceptance hasn't improved as significantly as expected.

Nothing is killing bitcoin things are going great compared to any other year.  :)

I don't know what is scarier, the people denying that control of BTC is slowly concentrating into the hands of large organizations and/or a few super-wealthy investors, or the people who think btc is doing fine and dandy despite being on a hardcore price decline for a solid 4+ months now...

Psst. Myriadcoin. The 1st Multi-PoW blockchain, something that Dan Kaminsky discussed at the 2013 Bitcoin Conference.

I love Bitcoin but I've gone head over heels for Myriadcoin, despite it being glanced over as a 'shitcoin' to most folks. So I understand there will be the typical negative reaction in a Bitcoin thread....

But at least check it out.

Without volatility there would be way more merchants who would bring even more liquidity to the market.

Wow, a democrat jumped the boards.
So, YOU decide that a guy that invest dollars in a project to mine bitcoins and obtain a calculated profit from the venture is selfish.
Bankers are selfish.
Enterpreneurs are selfish. You know, they intend to buy some shoes at china and sell them at Marcus Neumann with profit. Thieves!
Probably farmers and fishermen are "honest jobs" because they get their "hands dirty" right? Plumber-Joe-ism.
Oh wait, miners get dirty too. Oh but we're speaking of another kind of miners. White collar miners... Criminals!
Cmon.

Bitcoin Mining is the only reason Bitcoin is in full force right now, as they ARE the decentralized net that supports the transactions.
Not a guy holding BTCs waiting to be worth 25,000 dollars. THAT is the big issue of Bitcoin right now, in my opinion.

It was the same with btc, even some GPU miners turned on their rigs when the btc was around $1000. It's not about believing but good timing and luck (eg: exchange going up).

How the mining centers killing it? Nothing you have mentioned let consider bitcoin stop being a decentralized currency

Straw man...OP didn't say it was "unfair".

Can anyone quote what is decentralized about bitcoin in this thread yet?

The code/protocol and rate of generation is decentralized. Nothing else. Transaction into the ledger can be controlled, exchanging and trading are beholden to your Government.

Well everybody should know that decentralized means "no 3rd parties" - right?

So yes - we aren't decentralized :) This is forum :) not p2p.

But is it wrong? IMO ... it has got many goods and bads too.

Get over it BITCOIN was never intended to be a currency that's like calling a Hammer which is clearly a Tool or Utility to help accomplish a certain task a Currency. BITCOIN is Clearly a Utility that can be used to Trade and Barter with people anywhere in the world. It gets its value from the Fact that no one BITCOIN is the same or a copy of another. They are all Verifiable on the Block-Chain which acts as a Autonomous Decentralized Public Ledger.

People need to wake up and learn why BITCOIN can't be Centralized and never will be no matter how hard the Banking Elites try. BITCOIN is a Protocol written entirely in Open Source which allows for virtually anybody that has a computer or mobile device the ability to Trade and Barter with People anywhere in the world without the need for any Third Parties. NO Central Banking Authority is required. We can now all have the Authority to Create and issue units of trade that are easily verified on the Block-Chain anywhere in the world.

Bitcoin can be a currency or a form of storing value. It can be both, the higher the volatility the more interesing it is for traders and the less interesting it is for the merchants. Ultimately the market will tell where the jurney goes. All is possible. Even if it fails as a currency, it will still be a system to exchange big values over large distances in short time with almost no fees. Plus there are other advantages like it's unregulated at the moment and of course the biggest advantages of all:

- The Banksters have no control over it
- The Banksters don't profit from it

i don't think it has come as much of a surprise to most people here that people are greedy and want huge pieces of the cake. if anything would surprise me, it would be if it didn't happen. im sure there are a lot of bitcoiners who are in it to change the status quo, but i'm also pretty sure that there are many (if not more) who are only in it for the financial gain.

Decentralized means there is no one issuer like a government. 

Bitcoin depends on proof of work as issuance and we all know this.
Anyone is free to mine, anyone is free to join a pool.
If larger operations can do it more efficiently than smaller ones, so be it.
I don't see the problem.

First, it's not truly a currency yet. It might be at some point but today Bitcoin is more like a competitor to the ACH/EFT system than a true currency. ACH is primarily used between businesses to transfer and collect funds in many different currencies. Bitcoin allows private citizens to control the funds transfer themselves without the need of a business middleman. This concept is similar to Amazon Payments, PayPal and other systems but no one would argue that Amazon Payments is a currency.

Second, it is decentralized by definition. Centralization is a system where a central controlling force exercises absolute control over all lower levels. Bitcoin clearly does not fit into that category. If I want to send a transaction today that puts an image of Ben Bernanke in the blockchain there is absolutely nothing any of you can do about it.

So what do the bitcoiners need to do to turn it into a currency and keep it decentralized? Myself I'm trying to convince my local watering hole to be the first to accept BTC for beers and turtle soup! :) Hell it costs nothing to accept it why the hell not. Now a days if you can get on facebook you can use bitcoin on top of that its free global advertising to About 76,800,000 results (0.59 seconds) with the keywords bitcoin + bar.

It needs to be widely accepted to become a replacement currency. Your local watering hole needs to be able to buy all the supplies to run his bar and pay the rent with the Bitcoin he accepts. Some day that might happen but not today. It can stay decentralized and be used as a medium of exchange. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Of course I accepted it as a payment alternative in 2010 for my online stores. I'd like to see more local stuff accepting it its by far easier now and it is a start.

I mean if i'm going on a vacation and I read about a place that sold beers for bitcoins i'd go in and buy everyone a round who was sitting there. Thats really only one example I've been consulting several businesses.

Maybe i'm just salty that i'm not an over night multimillionare because I used bitcoins on a daily basis instead of holding lol.

Local Trader was launched recently: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/236k5d/mycelium_local_trader_is_now_available/
It is a person 2 person exchange built into Mycelium where you don't let a third party hold your coins or fiat.
... and is gaining traction: http://www.mycelium.com/lt/m/

cannot exists a centralized currency, in your terms, in a world where the resources are highly centralized.At least the centralization is less damaging than the others we have, and big investidors = pressure against bitcoin bans

So basically it's now "semi-centralized." I think that would be a fair statement. Calling it de-centralized is misleading at this point, though it may still technically be true.

not only are ASICs disallowing most people from mining, they are also used in massive pools. Isn't 51% of the network being mined by a few pools? That just means the three owners (or less?) of those pools have to be bribed, manipulated, threatened, or motivated to fundamentally destroy bitcoin. Not that resilient.

Reasons Why Bitcoin is and will remain decentralized :

1) Miners do not control the direction of the code, full nodes do. All someone needs is 20GB of space on their hard drive to have a vote on the implementation of the code used and ultimately direction of the network.

While there has a been a slight drop off in the quantity of nodes due to more people using SPV clients  :
https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/dashboard/chart/?days=60
 
There is still a very robust decentralized network of nodes across the world. I expect this trend to reverse with greater adoption and when the developers implement better ways to prune the size of the blockchain.

2) There are more than 16 companies who sell ASICs and they are located around the world. This is decentralized!

3) Most of the costs with ASIC manufacturing comes from the initial investments. Just like with computers expect faster and cheaper hardware in the future for mining which in turn means more ubiquitous and decentralized use. I wouldn't be surprised if mining rig space heaters are sold where they warm homes and earn money while doing so in the future.

4) More users every month = more decentralized

5) More retailers = more decentralized

6) There are still plenty of early adopters who have invested their gains in mining hardware

7) Bitcoin development is decentralized because its open source, the amount of developers keeps growing, the variations of bitcoin implementations keep growing as well. Examples of new versions... btcd (Go), Bits of proof (Java), bitcoinj (java), picocoin (C), libbitcoin (C++), caesure (Python), ect....

Overall Bitcoin is becoming more robust while remaining decentralized.

What do you mean by 'monopolized'. Can somebody own the majority of all bitcoins? Sure, its possible, Satoshi owns about 10% of them, but at this point, in order to buy a huge stake of bitcoin would require an absurd amount of money. The more you buy, the more the price rises.

Maybe it's about that there's very low fees and so there's like no 'middle man' correct, like a brokerage. I heard point like that.

But the thing is that with bitcoin, you only need to deal with an Exchange (like MtGox) when you want to trade your bitcoin for something like dollars, or you want to trade your dollars for bitcoin. If you are purchasing something with bitcoin, and staying inside the bitcoin ecosystem, then there are no middle men, and fee's are either zero, or close to zero in some cases. You just send your bitcoin to the recipient, and they send you your goods or services.

So still there's no reason to talk about any monopolization.

Uh, number of companies that make asics = has nothing to do with how de-centralized it is. There are tons of companies that make GPUs, but that doesn't mean any coin being mined with GPUs is more "de-centralized" because of it.


Or in the case of BFL apparently most of the cost comes from buying a house and other personal possessions with the pre-order funds.


I fail to see how either of these are valid statements. More users = nothing unless they are miners. Many "centralized" currencies have billions of users, way more than any cryptocurrency. Retailers don't diversify the network unless they are mining which they do not do. Again, many retailers accept USD, CAD, Euros, etc that doesn't make those currencies de-centralized.


And? Some people who made a lot of money early on and have built up bigger and bigger farms and pushed out their smaller rivals are actually making it less and less de-centralized.


Open source does not mean de-centralized. That means absolutely nothing.

Not true if they buy off-exchange. Supposedly the recovered Gox coins will be sold at auction, which means they will likely go to large whale investors at one rate, without the market going up a single tick in the process (though it may adjust after the fact when the sale is made public knowledge, but that won't affect the whale who already completed his transaction.)

The amount of different manufactures and sellers of Mining hardware shows how the hardware manufacturing is decentralized. This is important because it makes it difficult to co-opt every manufacturer being so decentralized. The more diverse the better and I would certainly appreciate more entrants into the arena.



Yes, you are failing to see the importance of users. The users are the ones who ultimately decide the implementation of the code and direction of the protocol, not the miners. Your analogy concerning retailers accepting foreign currencies does not apply because they cannot directly vote on fiat monetary policy. With the Bitcoin protocol you not only vote on the direction of the protocol but you can decide at a moments whim to opt out of any new changes being foisted upon you by the developers and fork the blockchain. 


The early adopters are largely made up by geeks and anarchists/libertarians that aren't part of any institutionalized investment class. Investors, banks have entered into Bitcoin and now are competing with these mining farms. Sure, some of the early adopters have left and some have been co-opted by the traditional financial sector but their are still plenty of miners who are invested in Bitcoin not just the profits but do so for ideological reasons as well. 


Certainly it does. Open source is decentralized because anyone can read and understand the code in a decentralized manner without centralized permissions. Open source is decentralized because it can be forked in a decentralized manner without any centralized permissions. Open source is decentralized because anyone can decide to contribute as a developer.

Please do explain to me how someone who does not mine, can fork the bitcoin blockchain.

And if someone tries to go against the tide they won't accomplish anything unless the massive players back them. Thus, de-centralized my ass.


I think you are being naive about how fast people sell out when money is involved. Also, I think it is highly improbable that too many hardcore geeks held onto their bitcoin and timed their sells perfectly. That's more likely to be the people with a lot of investing experience and financial resources. You know, the businessmen.


No, they are not even related. Open source does not mean de-centralized. Where are you coming up with these ideas? Open source just means people can view the code and sure they could make changes - and be promptly told to go fuck themselves when the big players don't back said changes. Zerocoin was basically started after they got frustrated that their "ideas" were not being accepted by the bitcoin leaders.

While I agree with the points that expose the flaws of Bitcoin, these flaws are not large enough (eg 51% Attack) to grant credence to the argument that Bitcoin is not decentralized.

Bitcoin currently is decentralized, although it may have potential to not be later...

Wasn't bitcoin centralized when gavin coded to block small transactions? I see the point of it but still, censorshiped and centralized controlling btc.

Big mining corps & developers own it.

A hard fork happens when any full-node or user(does not need to be a miner) on the network uses code which is not backwards compatible with the rest of the Bitcoin nodes on the network. That is the point the fork happens. Miners cannot force the users to use their preferred version of code and cannot steal users coins if the users decide not to "upgrade" to the new implementations of Bitcoin. Miners are simply users who also do a few other tasks like securing the network and processing new transactions.

Let me walk you through a few very unlikely worse case scenarios with bitcoin:

Unlikely Nightmare Scenario 1: All the developers become co-opted and implement black-listing(keep in mind that over 190 different devs have made commits which are found within Bitcoin core; hardly monolithic), The miners and users are unhappy with the changes.

Result- Most miners and users simply don't "upgrade" to the newest implementation or use one of many other variations which work with the existing blockchain (btcd (Go), Bits of proof (Java), bitcoinj (java), picocoin (C), libbitcoin (C++), caesure (Python), ect.) and a hard fork is created where the new code exists as an alt which no ones uses and has a vulnerable amount of hashing power securing it.

Unlikely Nightmare Scenario 2: The developers and miners collude and are mostly co-opted to implement a "feature" which most users dislike such as blacklisting.

 Result- Users simply don't "upgrade" to the newest implementation or use one of many other variations which work with the existing blockchain (libbitcoin,ect...) and a hard fork is created where the new code exists as an alt which no ones uses but has most of the hashing power secures it. The few miners who disagree with the new changes and all the users start mining with the few asics, and many gpu's and cpus on a separate blockchain. While this has considerably less hashing power than before, it still remains more secure than many alts because the size of the user base.

This is when a hardfork will occur with 2 different blockchains. One will have less hashing power but most users and the other will have 95% of miners and most developers but very few users.Try and guess which blockchain all the merchants will choose to accept? Yes, that's correct, the new blockchain controlled by the miners and devs will contain new bitcoins that will crash in value. What good is all that hashing power with no users and merchant acceptance?

The fact that alts exist shows open source inspires decentralization.

The fact that over 190 devs have made commits that are being used today to the Bitcoin core proves it is decentralized.

The fact that there are many other implementations of bitcoin that all work just fine on the same network with the existing blockchain which aren't alts( btcd (Go), Bits of proof (Java), bitcoinj (java), picocoin (C), libbitcoin (C++), caesure (Python), ect....) with each of their own githubs and own lead developers deciding what to accept proves bitcoin is robust and decentralized.

So I opened up a group buy that will fund an asic chip that can be bought at manufacture costs if you helped fund the project https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=601152.0 I'm only scouting right now to see if I am able to get enough funds before actually editing the OP to be more proper.

If you guys would like to express your opinion on it please post it I've had 3 people interested and between those 3 it would reach about $190k usd which is not even close to whats needed to get a 20 or 28nm asic readily available.

Would it be possible to change the protocol so asics couldnt be used? :)

Fat chance.

i like bitcoin,but it's not cheaper

That would more or less be a fork and create a new currency. The bitcoin majority would never go for it, since obviously a lot of them operate asic mining farms.

you're right, bitcoin is not decentralized anymore because of those darn miners and such. Bitcoin is dead.

First of all i 100% agree with OP. Bitcoin has lost big part of it's original idea on decentralization goes. ASIC's ruined it all. Someone (single person or small group) decided to "protect network" with hardware, when they could have done it much more effectivly with software (change in protocol) just like some other coins are doing right now.

From programmers point of view, it can be done in one day of work. It's really THAT easy. But it wont happen, as ppl that OWN ASIC production companies are in control of code creation and they will never let it happe, as that would mean that all their work and investment turns to dust in a second.

And that last part is why i think that Bitcoin REALLY lost it's "decentralization". I hope everyone realizes it sooner than later.

Do i think Bitcoin will die because of it? No. It can not die because of only 1 problem
Do i still believe in bitcoin? I do.
Do i still use it? I do.
Will i buy even more? I will.

I still beleive in Bitcoin and what it could be. Bitcoin can still be really great thing, but we must take it for what it really is, not for what it wanted to be long time ago.

Lets face it. The small guy has NO voice in Bitcoin. Just a cog in the machine.

Nobody here likes to be told that decentralization is a utopian dream and the power is always in the hands of the few.  The only thing that changes is who holds the power.

This is a complete myth. A full node has just as much voting power as a miner with regards to the direction of the code.

If you have 30Gb of HD space and a broadband connection with bitcoin's port TCP 8333 open than you have a full node with Bitcoin QT.

Check here - http://www.alloscomp.com/bitcoin/portStatus.php and if its closed than adjust your firewall/and/or contact your ISP and ask them to open it.
 

Yeah, I've been moving more towards PoS as well. The idea that those who can create specialized hardware can kill decentralization goes against what Bitcoin was made for. And sadly, if ASIC companies stopped selling hardware today, there would be just a couple people in control of all the minting.

I always say bitcoin will always be around. But how can we ignore the mining decentralization thats a coming. POS or other non mining proof ofs have got it right haven't they?

It kinda became centralized with the Gox.

Any currency fails with volatility.  If it was not a traded commodity perhaps the current path may be different.  Most people in the bitcoin community today are in it to see it rise in price not to buy something with it.

The one good thing to note is that it will always be here and can always revert to being more decentralized but fully decentralized as you describe it may not always be best for the community as a whole.

PoS is too flawed at this point. Someday someone may figure out a way to plug the holes, but for now, PoS is too easily exploited in several ways.