Do you trust the miners?

[ebliever]

yes of course, I am also one of the miners too 

How much do you trust the pool you mine on?

That's probably the more important question at this point. It's not just the centralization of miners, but the potential power of the pool operators of which there are only a handful. In principle miners could switch off to other pools or create new ones if a pool operator went rogue, but it still makes me uncomfortable that we've traded the board of the Federal Reserve for a similarly sized body of mining pool operators. Is that really an improvement?

[1715358321]

1715358321

[1715358321]

1715358321

[neoneros]

There is no other way at the moment to trust the miners and the miners have become big corporations that hold a lot of power(and consume it too). The same way we trust our ISP's, without trust we are nowhere. Bitcoin is too big to change the way the miners work, if even possible. As long as the mining operations are stil decentralised there is not much to worry about.

Are there ways to make it possible to mine without the big hardware investments? Corporate thinking in mining corporations is what might kill the blockchain and bitcoin. The basement operated miners at the rise of bitcoin were morre reliable than the big rigs now set up in China. But still, as long as they can only churn and earn, their power is limited. Grinding the operation to a halt will only cost them too..

[|Bitcoin|]

Yes. To make bitcoin the next big thing. We need to be unite and trust each other.

[killerjoegreece]

I trust decentralised miners and not big companies pulling the strings

[VeritasSapere]

We do not need to trust in the miners. We should trust in the design that aligns incentives towards good, because of game theory and human nature. This is what allows Bitcoin to function the way it does. Miners can always choose to switch pools and new pools can be created, therefore it is much better then a board at the federal reserve. This level playing field and free market ensures Bitcoins freedom, it has so far at least.

[Hugroll]

we're kinda forced to trust the miners.they keep the blockchain in place.

[sorryforthat]

we're kinda forced to trust the miners.they keep the blockchain in place.

Yeah, without them there really is nothing to be had here. You either choose to trust them or choose to move on from BTC all together

[notiely]

Hey all. Recent developments around the block size debate have sparked alot of discussion about several topics. I've seen many people arguing that BIP100 gives too much power to the miners. I'm not trying to provoke feelings one way or another, I'm just looking to see if people are willing to put their trust on miners about such decisions.

Yes I trust them, but not 100%.

[Blawpaw]

Hey all. Recent developments around the block size debate have sparked alot of discussion about several topics. I've seen many people arguing that BIP100 gives too much power to the miners. I'm not trying to provoke feelings one way or another, I'm just looking to see if people are willing to put their trust on miners about such decisions.

Why wouldn't you trust the miners? they are the ones who secure the network and maintain decentralization. There is an incentive to every and each miner to avoid the 51% attack.

[worhiper_-_]

Hey all. Recent developments around the block size debate have sparked alot of discussion about several topics. I've seen many people arguing that BIP100 gives too much power to the miners. I'm not trying to provoke feelings one way or another, I'm just looking to see if people are willing to put their trust on miners about such decisions.

Why wouldn't you trust the miners? they are the ones who secure the network and maintain decentralization. There is an incentive to every and each miner to avoid the 51% attack.

Around the time I posted this, there was talk about BIP100 giving too much control to the miners. The argument of some was that while miners benefit and are rewarded from bitcoin by nature, their goal is very short term or instant profit, they don't care about bitcoin succeeding, so although the power they have over bitcoin right now is much, users accept that, but trusting them with the block size limit choice seemed to be too much for some. I myself don't think that trusting miners with the block size limit vote would be an issue and hence why I asked this question.

[RGBKey]

I don't trust the miners to make decisions that benefit the whole comunity and not just themselves.

[mallard]

I don't trust the miners to make decisions that benefit the whole comunity and not just themselves.

If they piss off the community, the coin that they are mining will be worth less and so they will be making less profit.
It is in their interest to keep people (mostly) happy.

[RGBKey]

I don't trust the miners to make decisions that benefit the whole comunity and not just themselves.

I think that it will take a while before bitcoiners react to a problem like that.

If they piss off the community, the coin that they are mining will be worth less and so they will be making less profit.
It is in their interest to keep people (mostly) happy.

[Soros Shorts]

I don't trust the miners to make decisions that benefit the whole comunity and not just themselves.

Please give examples of what decisions miners might make that would just benefit themselves but be detrimental to the rest of the community? Miners generally have a lot vested in hardware and Bitcoin in general and are keen to see Bitcoin succeed. I certainly trust miners more that a small-time Bitcoin gambler or sig-campaigner who has very little vested in Bitcoin.

[Shadowblade]

if i dont trust the miners my coins wont be here tho

[worhiper_-_]

I don't trust the miners to make decisions that benefit the whole comunity and not just themselves.

Please give examples of what decisions miners might make that would just benefit themselves but be detrimental to the rest of the community? Miners generally have a lot vested in hardware and Bitcoin in general and are keen to see Bitcoin succeed. I certainly trust miners more that a small-time Bitcoin gambler or sig-campaigner who has very little vested in Bitcoin.

Right now I think it's generally accepted that the power miners have isn't something to be taken away from them as bitcoin has been functioning under those rules for so long. But BIP100 would put the decision on the future of the block size entirely on miners.

[MisterMoney]

Hey all. Recent developments around the block size debate have sparked alot of discussion about several topics. I've seen many people arguing that BIP100 gives too much power to the miners. I'm not trying to provoke feelings one way or another, I'm just looking to see if people are willing to put their trust on miners about such decisions.

If we don't trust them, who else we can trust.

[foreveryoung]

everybody who trust miners is rich,on past time, not nowdays..

[worhiper_-_]

everybody who trust miners is rich,on past time, not nowdays..

There are several big BTC ventures that have no good reason to put their full trust on miners when it comes to the block size debate however.

[sorryforthat]

There is no other way at the moment to trust the miners and the miners have become big corporations that hold a lot of power(and consume it too). The same way we trust our ISP's, without trust we are nowhere. Bitcoin is too big to change the way the miners work, if even possible. As long as the mining operations are stil decentralised there is not much to worry about.

Are there ways to make it possible to mine without the big hardware investments? Corporate thinking in mining corporations is what might kill the blockchain and bitcoin. The basement operated miners at the rise of bitcoin were morre reliable than the big rigs now set up in China. But still, as long as they can only churn and earn, their power is limited. Grinding the operation to a halt will only cost them too..

Do you think that the halving and future halvings will play a big role in bringing "basement mining" back into the limelight?