Bitcoin is resistant to state control.

[ekoice]

A new academic paper has mentioned bitcoin as resistant to state control.It says the following reasons for it.Bitcoin is not minted in a physical place,it operates under encryption and places a numerical ceiling on the number that can be created.Just like internet,bitcoin is multijurisdictional and so one state cannot shut it down and mkiners and users can move anywhere they want.

[1714050526]

1714050526

[Xester]

A new academic paper has mentioned bitcoin as resistant to state control.It says the following reasons for it.Bitcoin is not minted in a physical place,it operates under encryption and places a numerical ceiling on the number that can be created.Just like internet,bitcoin is multijurisdictional and so one state cannot shut it down and mkiners and users can move anywhere they want.

Bitcoin is not bounded by any political boundary and jurisdiction even if 1 country banned it other countries will still use it. But even though bitcoin is resistant to state control it does not mean that the state cannot limit bitcoin operations. In an extreme condition of the state will unite and will declare to ban bitcoin all over the world then it is the end for bitcoin.

[dinofelis]

State control is not necessarily banning.  For instance, the Chinese gov could make a deal with chinese miners, that, against electricity subsidy, they exclude certain addresses or so, and orphan blocks containing these transactions.  If these miner pools have more than 51% hash power, that becomes an unspoken soft fork that will block these addresses.  For the moment, the Chinese government should make an agreement with 5 persons: the 5 biggest pools.

[Senor.Bla]

State control is not necessarily banning.  For instance, the Chinese gov could make a deal with chinese miners, that, against electricity subsidy, they exclude certain addresses or so, and orphan blocks containing these transactions.  If these miner pools have more than 51% hash power, that becomes an unspoken soft fork that will block these addresses.  For the moment, the Chinese government should make an agreement with 5 persons: the 5 biggest pools.

I don't think so. Even with 51% hashing power you wont be able to mine all blocks. So some blocks will be mined by non chinese miners and they will built on this blocks. invalidating 2 or more blocks thanks to the chinese will be bad for bitcoin and its price. People will simply go with another coin and i doubt that the miners will be happy about that, so they will not agree to blocking certain addresses.

[davis196]

A new academic paper has mentioned bitcoin as resistant to state control.It says the following reasons for it.Bitcoin is not minted in a physical place,it operates under encryption and places a numerical ceiling on the number that can be created.Just like internet,bitcoin is multijurisdictional and so one state cannot shut it down and mkiners and users can move anywhere they want.

Bitcoin is not mined in physical place?Really?
What do you think about all the mining hardware?You have to put the mining hardware somewhere in order to mine btc.Mining with PC isn`t profitable.
What if some government or all the governments ban the mining hardware,not bitcoin.
Would bitcoin survive without miners?

[franky1]

What if some government or all the governments ban the mining hardware,not bitcoin.
Would bitcoin survive without miners?

though people think mining is all done in china.
even the "chinese" pools are spread across different countries.

so if one pool finds out it has a 'take down' order. they just load the ASICS up on a truck and move to a different factory.
only affecting a couple percent of network hash at a time. (even antpools 16% is actually spread over SEVERAL locations) and so the impact of moving asics is marginal and not going to affect block creation.

the 10min is an average so maybe it turns into 12minutes.. no one notices because its an average and not an actual real world fixed 10min anyway.

then within 48 hours those asics that are moved are then running in a new country

[Senor.Bla]

What if some government or all the governments ban the mining hardware,not bitcoin.
Would bitcoin survive without miners?

though people think mining is all done in china.
even the "chinese" pools are spread across different countries.

so if one pool finds out it has a 'take down' order. they just load the ASICS up on a truck and move to a different factory.
only affecting a couple percent of network hash at a time. (even antpools 16% is actually spread over SEVERAL locations) and so the impact of moving asics is marginal and not going to affect block creation.

the 10min is an average so maybe it turns into 12minutes.. no one notices because its an average and not an actual real world fixed 10min anyway.

then within 48 hours those asics that are moved are then running in a new country

i don't know if it's that easy. Some of the farms are quite big and it's not so easy to find a new space and relocate. Also if the miners are confiscated you still might have other but it would be a hard blow. Additionally the people in charge could be put in custody or what ever. Other than that i agree that it's not easy to bring all miners in china down.

[carlfebz2]

What if some government or all the governments ban the mining hardware,not bitcoin.
Would bitcoin survive without miners?

though people think mining is all done in china.
even the "chinese" pools are spread across different countries.

so if one pool finds out it has a 'take down' order. they just load the ASICS up on a truck and move to a different factory.
only affecting a couple percent of network hash at a time. (even antpools 16% is actually spread over SEVERAL locations) and so the impact of moving asics is marginal and not going to affect block creation.

the 10min is an average so maybe it turns into 12minutes.. no one notices because its an average and not an actual real world fixed 10min anyway.

then within 48 hours those asics that are moved are then running in a new country

i don't know if it's that easy. Some of the farms are quite big and it's not so easy to find a new space and relocate. Also if the miners are confiscated you still might have other but it would be a hard blow. Additionally the people in charge could be put in custody or what ever. Other than that i agree that it's not easy to bring all miners in china down.

Imagine how big is China and locating every one of those miner wont really be an easy job at all and it would takes time and as being mentioned they can easily relocate from place to another which would really be a very hard task for government. This assumption is possible but really hard to implement at all.

[Senor.Bla]

What if some government or all the governments ban the mining hardware,not bitcoin.
Would bitcoin survive without miners?

though people think mining is all done in china.
even the "chinese" pools are spread across different countries.

so if one pool finds out it has a 'take down' order. they just load the ASICS up on a truck and move to a different factory.
only affecting a couple percent of network hash at a time. (even antpools 16% is actually spread over SEVERAL locations) and so the impact of moving asics is marginal and not going to affect block creation.

the 10min is an average so maybe it turns into 12minutes.. no one notices because its an average and not an actual real world fixed 10min anyway.

then within 48 hours those asics that are moved are then running in a new country

i don't know if it's that easy. Some of the farms are quite big and it's not so easy to find a new space and relocate. Also if the miners are confiscated you still might have other but it would be a hard blow. Additionally the people in charge could be put in custody or what ever. Other than that i agree that it's not easy to bring all miners in china down.

Imagine how big is China and locating every one of those miner wont really be an easy job at all and it would takes time and as being mentioned they can easily relocate from place to another which would really be a very hard task for government. This assumption is possible but really hard to implement at all.

We talk about china, where you as the government can make something up and arrest the people in charge. But let us focus on the equipment. relocating does cost money and you also have a downtime. How long do you think they can operate at a profit while relocating all the time? If the government will find out about a mining farm they will raid it and not wait until it relocates.

[dinofelis]

State control is not necessarily banning.  For instance, the Chinese gov could make a deal with chinese miners, that, against electricity subsidy, they exclude certain addresses or so, and orphan blocks containing these transactions.  If these miner pools have more than 51% hash power, that becomes an unspoken soft fork that will block these addresses.  For the moment, the Chinese government should make an agreement with 5 persons: the 5 biggest pools.

I don't think so. Even with 51% hashing power you wont be able to mine all blocks. So some blocks will be mined by non chinese miners and they will built on this blocks. invalidating 2 or more blocks thanks to the chinese will be bad for bitcoin and its price. People will simply go with another coin and i doubt that the miners will be happy about that, so they will not agree to blocking certain addresses.

Well, if they have made you an offer you can hardly refuse, you will orphan them, because if you don't, they can verify this.  With 75% of hash rate agreeing on the secret hard fork, the orphaning is not that big.  Chances for 1 bloc orphaning (normal) is 1/4.  Chances of 2 blocs orphaning: 1/16.  Chances of 3 blocs orphaning, 1/64.  Chances of 4 blocs orphaning, 1/256.  So, essentially every 1000 blocs, you will have 5 blocs or more orphaned this way.  Not a big deal, especially because most transactions will be taken over in the new chain prong.  So as a user, you wouldn't even notice if you're not concerned.  You had 5 confirmations on the chain ; boing, these are orphaned, by another prong where you ALSO had 5 confirmations.  You wouldn't notice. 

[Senor.Bla]

State control is not necessarily banning.  For instance, the Chinese gov could make a deal with chinese miners, that, against electricity subsidy, they exclude certain addresses or so, and orphan blocks containing these transactions.  If these miner pools have more than 51% hash power, that becomes an unspoken soft fork that will block these addresses.  For the moment, the Chinese government should make an agreement with 5 persons: the 5 biggest pools.

I don't think so. Even with 51% hashing power you wont be able to mine all blocks. So some blocks will be mined by non chinese miners and they will built on this blocks. invalidating 2 or more blocks thanks to the chinese will be bad for bitcoin and its price. People will simply go with another coin and i doubt that the miners will be happy about that, so they will not agree to blocking certain addresses.

Well, if they have made you an offer you can hardly refuse, you will orphan them, because if you don't, they can verify this.  With 75% of hash rate agreeing on the secret hard fork, the orphaning is not that big.  Chances for 1 bloc orphaning (normal) is 1/4.  Chances of 2 blocs orphaning: 1/16.  Chances of 3 blocs orphaning, 1/64.  Chances of 4 blocs orphaning, 1/256.  So, essentially every 1000 blocs, you will have 5 blocs or more orphaned this way.  Not a big deal, especially because most transactions will be taken over in the new chain prong.  So as a user, you wouldn't even notice if you're not concerned.  You had 5 confirmations on the chain ; boing, these are orphaned, by another prong where you ALSO had 5 confirmations.  You wouldn't notice. 

Just from looking at the conversations regarding a BU fork at 75% the orphan rate seems to be a big deal to many. You will have smaller orphaned blocks by the hour and only once a week a 5 block orphan, but if we look at 50% it is 1/32 = every 5 hours. I can not imagine this would be good for Bitcoin.People would notice and talk about and we would lose many users that are here for idealistic reasons.

[QuestionAuthority]

Bitcoin is completely impervious to state control because governments don't give a shit about bitcoin. Trading bitcoin for fiat is when governments gain absolute control over Bitcoin just as they do when any other commodity is traded for fiat. They don't begin to care until their money becomes involved.

[Meuh6879]

Similar thread : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1820098.0

[dinofelis]

Just from looking at the conversations regarding a BU fork at 75% the orphan rate seems to be a big deal to many. You will have smaller orphaned blocks by the hour and only once a week a 5 block orphan, but if we look at 50% it is 1/32 = every 5 hours. I can not imagine this would be good for Bitcoin.People would notice and talk about and we would lose many users that are here for idealistic reasons.

No, if there is a BU fork, there won't be any orphaning, because you then have two chains.  Non-BU miners will not mine upon BU blocks, and BU miners having majority will build more and more on the stronger BU chain, if they keep this majority.  You simply have two chains, with different miners (the BU miners on one chain, and the non-BU miners on the other one: two coins).

There is no more orphaning between Bitcoin-BU and Bitcoin-SW than there is orphaning between, say, namecoin and bitcoin.

[Tyrantt]

yes but china is currently leading far ahead in bitcoin mining, right? With diff rising and rewards dropping, who's gonna step up to China?

Bitcoin is completely impervious to state control because governments don't give a shit about bitcoin. Trading bitcoin for fiat is when governments gain absolute control over Bitcoin just as they do when any other commodity is traded for fiat. They don't begin to care until their money becomes involved.

and how long will it take for them to see and figure out a way to use the bitcoin to their advantage?

[n691309]

A new academic paper has mentioned bitcoin as resistant to state control.It says the following reasons for it.Bitcoin is not minted in a physical place,it operates under encryption and places a numerical ceiling on the number that can be created.Just like internet,bitcoin is multijurisdictional and so one state cannot shut it down and mkiners and users can move anywhere they want.

I think similar to this, bitcoin can not be shut down in a few moments or within a short period of time, the miners are all over the world and there are some other external things that can affect the popularity of bitcoin and it's stability but I can say that very indirectly the governments can do something to bitcoin except if they ban the bitcoin to be used in their countries.

[QuestionAuthority]

yes but china is currently leading far ahead in bitcoin mining, right? With diff rising and rewards dropping, who's gonna step up to China?

Bitcoin is completely impervious to state control because governments don't give a shit about bitcoin. Trading bitcoin for fiat is when governments gain absolute control over Bitcoin just as they do when any other commodity is traded for fiat. They don't begin to care until their money becomes involved.

and how long will it take for them to see and figure out a way to use the bitcoin to their advantage?

Fiat must remain under government control. Economies are balanced using monetary controls which includes manipulating the money supply. That can't be done without control over the production of fiat. Bitcoin will never be any government's fiat.

They already have learned to use Bitcoin to their advantage. The USA parsed the block chain to help catch and prosecute Ross Ulbrich (DPR), Robert Faiella (BtcKing), Charlie Shrem and many of the users of Silk Road. They have learned to track btc addresses to identify people where their address is used in connection with their real identity. They have made a ton of money auctioning off confiscated BTC. I would think the US government loves bitcoin.

[European Central Bank]

while bitcoin itself could continue to operate run by someone, somewhere as long as the internet still runs, the state could wield huge control over bitcoin's utility.

all they have to do is kill off all the exchanges, prosecute the publicly known developers and companies and suddenly alot less people will decide it's worth anything to them.

you can't kill bitcoin. you can probably as good as kill the demand and utility.

[20kevin20]

while bitcoin itself could continue to operate run by someone, somewhere as long as the internet still runs, the state could wield huge control over bitcoin's utility.

all they have to do is kill off all the exchanges, prosecute the publicly known developers and companies and suddenly alot less people will decide it's worth anything to them.

you can't kill bitcoin. you can probably as good as kill the demand and utility.

As soon as they let some companies run with Bitcoin accepted as a payment method, it's not going to happen too soon. They can't back it off now, it's too late. What they can do is just keep throwing rocks at Bitcoin through the mainstream media so people will get afraid of investing in it, and investors will leave. China successfully did that in the past months. But even without exchanges Bitcoin trading is still gonna happen. You can find people in your area that want to sell or buy Bitcoin pretty easy.

[megynacuna]

A new academic paper has mentioned bitcoin as resistant to state control.It says the following reasons for it.Bitcoin is not minted in a physical place,it operates under encryption and places a numerical ceiling on the number that can be created.Just like internet,bitcoin is multijurisdictional and so one state cannot shut it down and mkiners and users can move anywhere they want.

But what else does it take to bring financial freedom if not the list of reasons you just put up there? Bitcoin was made to get us out of governmental control and grant us global decentralized economy and I think a deviation from juetbon cor principle will render Bitcoin futile and do it was indeed made to resist state control.