Why centralization is way that Bitcoin will go in future in current state.

[andron8383]

I article was mad after reading :
https://cointelegraph.com/news/why-trusting-third-parties-like-okcoin-huobi-dangerous-for-bitcoin

Some people don't understand that system which is functioning right now is forcing to creation central systems why ?
Simple in world when people want fast and low fee transactions bitcoin with larger adoption can not stay pressure.
Some devs are making trips to Africa promote Bitcoin while there most people earn 1-2$ day so transaction fee like 0.1$ current is not actable.
For me making some small purchase with fee like for 2$ and pay 0.1$ fee is ridiculous.
Can you tell me what is point of promoting Bitcoin there ?
Dogecoin with fee like 0.001$ is more reasonable but it will choke to at some point in same way.
To avoid that problems is there only one-way local central banks,exchanges that will manage transactions inside their systems,
but how it ends all we know MtGox 2.0.... Or current freeze of system in China.

I think that we have to rethink the way developments go now into something like side chains etx to bypass limits fees and blocks limits.
Something like you pack 20 000 translations in one pack make it on side chain and put into main chain as single.

I think that 1MB,2MB... 10MB will choke at some point blocksize is side problem .
It won't solve problem in long run. Whole blocksize debate is waste of energy IMO.
What you think about it ?

PS: Yesterday when i wanted send some BTC default fee on blockchain.info was 0.002BTC=2$... this is joke.

[1713540064]

1713540064

[BiTZeD]

First who use Blockchain.info has not understood what Bitcoin is. And you are paying such crazy high fees because it is a lucrative company that need to make money somewhere.

[szpalata]

Those fees are indeed crazy but ur seems there's been changes since yesterday because the normal rates were confirming faster just like before so hope it stays that way and not get high again.

[Senor.Bla]

Most people will agree that fees are higher then necessary. The possible transactions per second are a problem if Bitcoin wants to grow. Blocksize would be one possible way of relief, but would bring troubles from another side as larger blocks lead to problems with bandwidth and data limits. About some trips to Africa to promote Bitcoin i do not know anything, but since Bitcoin is not a company, this trip was not paid by Bitcoin, so i do not care to much.
Your conclusion to create central bank like entities seems not like a good idea, but also not like the only solution. There are also different opinions if second layer solutions are a way to centralize Bitcoin, but i guess nobody knows how this will play out and we will just see. I think Bitcoin needs some kind of on chain scaling (even if it is only to see how this changes the situation, to have more information for the future) and 2nd layer solutions should only be optional.

[requester]

yes to run any currency we need law, rules and regulation and the important factor is someone who could control the system look after the system and help to run the system smoothly so we need centralization of bitcoin. since transaction per second are increasing day by day and it will create a havoc in future so to control all those problems we need centralization.

[Kprawn]

Bitcoin was supposed to be a alternative P2P payment network, and it was supposed to scale as it grew bigger. This is not happening, because the

Blockstream developers have throttled the Block size growth down, because they want to implement SegWit and the LN. They see scaling in a

whole other way than Satoshi intended it to be. { Is Satoshi's scaling the ultimate solution?... Who knows.... Is Blockstreams roadmap the way

forward?... Well the majority of the NODES seems to say NO.  .... So yes, until this is sorted out.. centralized services will have to be our

interim solution. 

[dhampir-D]

I think there are indeed factors that can make Bitcoin more centralized in the future, and this is mainly due to the fact that it is difficult for small users to enter the mining sector, causing the big investors to have bigger participation in this. But I think there are ways to facilitate decentralization. Companies that are willing to provide equipment for small miners, at affordable costs, need to enter the market. I also think that if solar mining becomes popular, things will become better for small miners as well.

[alyssa85]

Remember there are lots of cryptocurrencies. What usually happens when fees get high is people start using Ether or Doge to move money. The number of transactions on bitcoin then drop, and then they start using bitcoin again. Rinse and repeat. Of course the risk is that at some point people stick to the alt and bitcoin usage starts to shrivel.

P.S. Here is Eric Vorhees on twitter:

https://twitter.com/ErikVoorhees/status/830197808573587457

I'm finding myself holding some extra ETH to use as payments, since Bitcoin is becoming too expensive/delayed

[manselr]

Bitcoin was supposed to be a alternative P2P payment network, and it was supposed to scale as it grew bigger. This is not happening, because the

Blockstream developers have throttled the Block size growth down, because they want to implement SegWit and the LN. They see scaling in a

whole other way than Satoshi intended it to be. { Is Satoshi's scaling the ultimate solution?... Who knows.... Is Blockstreams roadmap the way

forward?... Well the majority of the NODES seems to say NO.   .... So yes, until this is sorted out.. centralized services will have to be our

interim solution.  

Bitcoin was supposed to be p2p CASH. Read the whitepaper.

How can bitcoin ever be cash if the nodes are centralized to allow for global usage? (because the only way to allow global usage would be huge datacenters running the nodes, and that would mean it is no longer cash, but a paypal with a token)

It's stupid. So if satoshi wanted that, he made a mistake.

Bitcoin + segwit + LN is the only way bitcoin can remain censorship resistant, all other alternatives are objectively a disaster.

Also the only way to ever get true decentralized exchanges, is with LN technology, im sure the smart guys could code a fully decentralized exchange.

So wake the fuck up, LN is the future, bitcoin can never do anything but be store of value without a 2nd layer solution.

[andron8383]

...
So wake the fuck up, LN is the future, bitcoin can never do anything but be store of value without a 2nd layer solution.

I agree with that we have to have 2nd layer solution around bitcoin to avoid spiriting BTC into ETH DOGE name others,
for real this is happening right now and others are forced to use ETH DOGE to make business than use BTC.
In therms of store of value BTC needs usage and be backed by people using it, who will care about outdated slow technology.
On real war people with better gun win so BTC need to evolve it cannot stay at same place forever.
To not change core we need 2nd layer solution.

[HaXX0R1337]

First who use Blockchain.info has not understood what Bitcoin is. And you are paying such crazy high fees because it is a lucrative company that need to make money somewhere.

That is the exact truth,why would you use blockchain to store your coins and they really have a high transaction rate and even the average transaction rate at the moment is around 50k satoshi and why would you give 0.002 btc as your fees.It is a common practice that dust amounts  are not appreciated by online wallets and so no one would be sending micro transactions through these kind of services.

[Cashew]

...
So wake the fuck up, LN is the future, bitcoin can never do anything but be store of value without a 2nd layer solution.

I agree with that we have to have 2nd layer solution around bitcoin to avoid spiriting BTC into ETH DOGE name others,
for real this is happening right now and others are forced to use ETH DOGE to make business than use BTC.
In therms of store of value BTC needs usage and be backed by people using it, who will care about outdated slow technology.
On real war people with better gun win so BTC need to evolve it cannot stay at same place forever.
To not change core we need 2nd layer solution.

LN is all except the good way to go. Since this will be a service ran by a third-party company, meant to make profit, they will be able to interfere in Bitcoin's going. This is the inverse of what Satoshi would like for Bitcoin. And people, stop crying for long transactions, they are kinda fast. At least enough for the greatest majority of us.

[bravehearth0319]

First who use Blockchain.info has not understood what Bitcoin is. And you are paying such crazy high fees because it is a lucrative company that need to make money somewhere.

Blockchain is the most common circumstances that faces the bitcoin community every now and then, then if you want to be prioritize you should give high charge fees in the transaction to your bitcoin.

[Mometaskers]

I've been reading some threads and read somewhere that volume from China was down to 33% and that some exchanges froze withdrawals. If this would eliminate the fake volume then shouldn't this mean the transaction fees should go down to its previous levels?

[mindrust]

First who use Blockchain.info has not understood what Bitcoin is. And you are paying such crazy high fees because it is a lucrative company that need to make money somewhere.

It is not just blockchain.info dude. It is the same in every other wallet now. Few days ago i made a transaction of 0.565btc's to my btc-e account and my electrum wallet cut a fee of 0.00158323btc's. That's almost 0.002 already. And you know what? You can't even try to send your coins for free now. Electrum just don't let it. So free transactions are no more.

People don't like me when i say that but those fucking fees rose too much and they keep rising.