but some people still have the mindset of the good old days where they think 'media' get paid to do the research and then explain it to the lay person accurately but in a simple form.

things have changed its now used to twist accurate information and not make it simple which hides the truth and then blames people for reading it without the people doing the checks themselves..

you're never going to convince a media outlet to change its ways simply by no longer viewing them with a loss of a 0.001cent pay per clickbait fee , especially if they are funded by hundreds of thousands of dollars privately.. the 0.001cent click income wont rivel their private income to run a story

the simple solution is to never believe anything you read in media and to find non-media proof/evidence/research from real sources.

much like Pieter Wuille implemented levelDB before actually doing any backward compatibility bug tests to see how it would effect the blockchain in 2013.. and whooops it split the chain..

0.8 leveldb bug

in short
pieter wuille is not your god either, even if he is paid to be

the banking cartels dominance is already apparent, hyperledger is a "phase 2 attack"..

guess whos building it.. blockstream

the banking cartel want bitcoin to fail. they are doing it slowly and purposefully
much like boiling a frog by putting it in cold water and slowly heading it so that it doesnt jump around, rather than throwing it in hot water. and shocking it to jump around

instead of limiting sigops to control spam or other CODE/tech methods.. they use fee wars and use that as bait to promote LN
(rustyrusssel of blockstream heading it up)
right now half a dozen third world countries wont use bitcoin because a TX fee alone is more than an hours labour in their country.

as for the switch to LN. those making it(blockstream/banking cartel) had a round table meetup in milan and suggested a 0.006btc deposit fee to use LN for 10 days.. as an acceptable fee
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/2016-November/000648.html
them trying to figure out how to stop spamming on LN.
go to "results" and the spreadsheet shows using fees.
(prepaid tab) 0.006btc prepaid. locktime 864000seconds (10 days) at todays prices thats over $4.20 prepay fee (100 minimum wage hours labour in developing countries)

standard tricks of banking cartels, use economics to control everything. rather than rational and acceptable code

economics:
based on stats of real world uses of an average person using a credit card or buying something from a shop, is 42 times a month. (14 times per 10 days)
that 0.006 deposit (over $4 at todays valuation) just to use it 14 times(average real world usage)... is yet another barrier of entry.

so dont think LN is the utopia you think it is..
as for the next bait and switch they will propose (more reasons not to expand real bitcoin onchain capacity) will be sidechains.

look at blockstreams patent for BITCOIN sidechains
http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.html&r=3&f=G&l=50&d=PG01&s1=%22bitcoin%22&p=1&OS=%22blockchain%22&RS=%22bitcoin%22

yes
they are trying remove the openness of what people can and cannot do with bitcoin by making any bitcoin sidechain property of Gmaxwell and adam back by default.

and guess what else. these sidechains are "demurrage" meaning your holdings of the sidchain token slowly disapears over time, and they get to keep the bitcoin that they lock you out from.

so while screwing with transaction fees decades befor they are important. is crippling bitcoin
so while delaying/holding off on REAL bitcoin capacity growth they are crippling bitcoin

know your enemy

blockstream came about in 2013
bitcoin-core came about in 2013

before blockstream it was bitcoin-qt, which anyone could tinker with
gmaxwell and many others have been paid to go against the bitcoin ethos and instead forfil contractual obligations

know your enemy

dont give core(blockstream contractors and 90+ unpaid spell checker interns) ultimate power of dictatorship.
instead get bitcoin back to being a decentralised and diverse open network of free-choice and no barriers.

we should not rely on those offchain plans as the future of bitcoin. especially in the hands of the bankers. especially when its so obvious what the end game is

i dont want that. im just explaining what the banking cartel are doing.

too many people are defending blockstream and seeing hyperledger as the way forward for bitcoin. im just throwing info out to show what the banking cartels are doing. not what we should be wanting.

i want bitcoin to remain as an asset currency with no barrier to entr, no barrier to utility as the open choice to stay separate and away the risks of the banking cartels hyperledger

knowing your enemy is better then not knowing it and pretending you will win the battle by default.
i find it strange how people ar playing into the bankers hands and wanting to squeeze bitcoin into a limb of the banking cartel

as for increasing the supply.. this is already being proposed by blockstream
they are changing the real hard coded units of measure in the future. but hiding it from sight at the users GUI/frontend.

satoshi CODED bitcoin to produce
5000000000 units per block initially, then halve every 210000blocks. it was only a human mind. not code that converts this unit of measure to 50btc for human GUI purposes
currently at code level we are making
1250000000 units of measure a block
as part of LN. and future bitcoin node code that will change to
1250000000000 units of measure a block

but at GUI level it will be 12.50000000,000
meaning although people can say there are still 21mill (GUI measures of btc cap)
at code level
2100000000000000 units of measure will be
2100000000000000000 units of measure

thats right bitcoin loses its fixed 100000000 unit of measure status
extending mining beyond the year 2140.

but hey lets now watch blockstream/banker defenders call it a good thing because the GUI tells users its still a 21m cap. even if there are 1000x more individual units that can handed out.

when this kind of thing is don on wallstreet, its called share dilution.

digital currency group and blockstream are both in the 90+ bankers hyperledger collaboration

its not about transparency as in every customers account balance is transparent to the public.

its not to make customer accounts "public".. but sell customer details privately (including access to balance and spending data) to the highest bidder. much the same as how google and facebook sell personal data. even when users have their profiles private to the public that data can still be sold behind the scenes

theres other parts that they can be more transparent about how they make their money (previously as loans<-> money creation) so thy can sell this money creation and monkey making, as a sellable service itself. rather than the previous hidden policy that meant they had to keep bank secrets a secret 

i have to quote someone from another topic that the OP will trust to understand the point of this whole topic

due to the fact there is no chinese collusion.
due to the fact its all hypothetical doomsday theory not even backed by rational stats


i hope the OP listens to the person i just quoted
(himself)

not so much taken charge. but more so got people to realise that the consensus mechanism is a tool for diverse compromise and agreement. not to ignore it and instead divide and conquer

Ghash was one server with 51%

what these "chinese screamers" are doing is combining  5 separate pools, maintained in 15 offices in different countries, across 20 servers all because the many owners are chinese..
even if those owners may be sunning it up in pattaya thailand or travelling the world or organising events in america..

some how these 5 separate pools are all suddenly colluding and all on their knee's getting whipped by the chinese goverment.

its like they think its all run under one single warehouse..
they dont understand the basic technicals.

you singled out the chinese.. rather than any particular pool.
you have no shown proof that a nation has done this. or a particular pool that might have done this.

if you however mentioned a pool by name, rather then talking about a nation. then you would sound more rational in your theories

bank of england, scotland, canada, america, switzerland, india, china, singapore, australia, taiwan, russia, germany and many others are already involved in hyperledger.

aswell as international payment/remittance services like union pay, visa etc etc.

as for when..
well they have already passed what bitcoiner would call the "bitcoin pizza event"
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-australia-tech-banks-idUSKCN12O0DX

australia trades 88 bales of cotton to china for $35,000 using the blockchain created by the banking cartel under the hyperledger umbrella

its not possible
once a transaction relays to another node, and then another its not possible to then know the origin of the tx.. so a pool cannot decide to accpt or deny based on geographic origin.

the op lacks research and understanding and is just trying to sell his racial mindset. not any real technical details

lol
a wiki link (facepalm)
research properly

try your hand at the realisation that BW / bitbank / antpool have farms in mongolia
f2pool have farms all over the world
bitfury have farms predominantly in georgia, finland iceland

etc
so hash power is not all chinese!!
do some number crunching

they are also not administrated in china.
do some number crunching

then come back with some actual rational, realistic and factual numbers

have a nice day

vs


to add:
bitfury
http://bitfury.com/contacts

lol thats a summarised % that does not explain the physical location...
but anyway:

f2pool, run from thailand. hashpower international.. servers international

you cannot win a debate just by screaming a %. without knowing how that % is made or were its made or who/where its controlled.
% is meaningless unless you research the context

51%, 55% 60%, 70%

your just making up numbers
in just 8 hour you have been throwing out random numbers backed by no researched evidence. but instead quoting others who have not actually researched.

quoting an article that quotes an article is not proof.

go research properly

f2pool. has ZERO chinese government influence.
hashpower not in china, servers not in china administrators not in china domain not in china.
so discount f2pools from your random number

bitfury. has ZERO chinese government influence.
hashpower not in china, servers not in china administrators not in china domain not in china.
so discount bitfury from your random number

actually do the research beyond biased human opinion. look at where the adminstrators are, servers and actual hashpower.
and come back with a factual number that doesnt change 4 times in ~7 hours

banks and bitcoin wont mix.
banks wont offer bitcoin at the bank teller counter or a banks own ATM

bitcoin wont overtake fiat.
bitcoin will continue separate as an alternative to FIAT2.0 (hyperledger)

there are laws to keep fiat dominant. such as tax and minimum wage laws (legal tender) that are there to keep fiat as the controlling circulated currency of a nation.

the banks will basically switch how their database is stored, (via hyperledger) but essentially from the citizens point of view nothing will really change legally/morally. it will still be bank managed funds.

as for the "open source" nature of hyperledger. thats just phase one.. get some free labour and recruit coders (like blockstream already got recruited) .. but the final "product" wont be open source, it will be closed source in shiny metal boxes sold as secure nodes to only the banking community who are authorised to purchase the closed end product system

its no secret.
hyperledger.

they have been very public about it.
oh and guess who is programming it.. blockstream, yep. gmaxwell and chums.

there are many factors and many means of attack.

but you are right. the main weakness is the pool server itself and the stratums servers and the admin, IT team

hense why stratum servers are international and the administrators are too..

like i shown for f2pool.. thailand not china.. i guess the chinese government need to walk 1000 miles, and then walk 1000 miles more to slap the administrator with a wet sushi to get the administrator to do anything

all these "china own bitcoin" stuff has been mitigated AGES ago, its old news and just used as a distraction.

hashpower distributed world wide
statum servers  distributed world wide
domain names not .cn, but .com meaning not chinese
administrators distributed world wide.

you do realise that your concern is out dated. the pools mitigated your concern about 2 years ago.

chinese government cannot take down the domains because they are not .cn
chinese goverments cannot slap the admin because the admin are dotted around the world
chinese goverments cannot take down the statum servers because they are dotted around the world
chinese goverments cannot shut off 51%-90% of hashpower because 51%-90% of hash power IS NOT IN CHINA!!

you are about two years too late.
the so called chinese pools have already adapted and mitigated the risks.

your issues have already been addressed and the issues you raise are resolved.

you would actually have a valid point if:
domains ended .cn
stratum servers only existed in china
farms were not in mongolia, Tibet, Finland, Iceland, and the Republic of Georgia and the rest of the world
administrators were all in one building in china.

but for all 4 points. those have been addressed ages ago