Do the miners control the network or the nodes?

[Blinken]

Do the miners control the network or the nodes?

I always thought the nodes controlled the network. The nodes decide which transactions enter the pool, and in fact I thought that the nodes decide whether blocks are valid as well, so even if the miners do something crazy isn't it the nodes that are the ultimate deciders?

I thought that the miners are relatively irrelevant compared to the nodes because even if a miner has 1000x the hashing power of everybody else, if the nodes blackball the blocks from that miner then the miner will be ignored, so all their hashing power is useless. Even if you compute a block first, if the nodes reject your block then you control nothing, at least that is what I thought. No?

[1714603993]

1714603993

[1714603993]

1714603993

[1714603993]

1714603993

[AgentofCoin]

...

Yes, you are basically correct.
It is much more complicated, but essentially over time, when miners
and nodes split into two separate systems, the power was split between them.

A new action can not be done on the network without the other approving, in theory.

Today, it works like this on the power scale:
(1 = most power / 5 = least power)

1) Users, Traders, & Investors
2) Exchanges & economies using Validator Nodes
3) Independent Validator Nodes
4) Miners using Validator Nodes
5) Miners using SPV and etc.

Unfortunately, no one has educated the miners that they are last in line.
They may have the most financial interest, but that doesn't equate to power to
dictate within the network. They are only block builders who MUST build
in compliance with the networks collectively agreed upon rule set.

If a Miner attempts to assert more power than is allowed, that is a malicious miner.
They are no longer considered "honest" and become a threat to the whole.

The whole system works because everything is inter-dependent in ways, but
ultimately is a type of "separation of powers".

[dothebeats]

As far as my understanding goes, miners and nodes' relationship is like hardware-software relationship. One cannot progress without the other one verifying and approving such requests, so in simple words, the "power" is basically divided between them in the network. But if you're looking for a much deeper answer as to the current situation of bitcoin...

[odolvlobo]

Do the miners control the network or the nodes?

I always thought the nodes controlled the network. The nodes decide which transactions enter the pool, and in fact I thought that the nodes decide whether blocks are valid as well, so even if the miners do something crazy isn't it the nodes that are the ultimate deciders?

I thought that the miners are relatively irrelevant compared to the nodes because even if a miner has 1000x the hashing power of everybody else, if the nodes blackball the blocks from that miner then the miner will be ignored, so all their hashing power is useless. Even if you compute a block first, if the nodes reject your block then you control nothing, at least that is what I thought. No?

No one node or group of nodes controls the network. That is the nature of a decentralized network.

• A miner controls which transactions go into his block, but cannot control what transactions go into other blocks.
• A node (including miners) controls what transactions are relayed to other nodes, but cannot control what transactions other nodes relay.
• A node (including miners) controls what what blocks are added to its copy of the block chain, but cannot control what blocks are added to other nodes' copies of the block chain.
• A node deciding which blocks are added to its block chain, gives value to the block rewards in its chain.

[Haladay]

No one node or group of nodes controls the network. That is the nature of a decentralized network.

• A miner controls which transactions go into his block, but cannot control what transactions go into other blocks.
• A node (including miners) controls what transactions are relayed to other nodes, but cannot control what transactions other nodes relay.
• A node (including miners) controls what what blocks are added to its copy of the block chain, but cannot control what blocks are added to other nodes' copies of the block chain.
• A node deciding which blocks are added to its block chain, gives value to the block rewards in its chain.

Nobody could have explained it way better. 

In addition, to me, hard fork attempts such as BTU only aim to centralize the currency so that they could have more control of it. I don't think they really wanna solve the issues which BTC has faced.

[DannyHamilton]

Do the miners control the network or the nodes?

Every solo miner and every mining pool IS ALSO A NODE.

Miners that perticipate in a pool can choose which pool they want to mine in and can refuse to mine in a pool that supports changes that they don't agree with.

I always thought the nodes controlled the network. The nodes decide which transactions enter the pool,

The pool?

What pool is that?

Every node (including solo miners and mining pools) has ITS OWN POOL.  A node only decides which transactions it accepts into its own pool, it have no control over the pool that any other node is running.  A node CAN refuse to relay a transaction to the nodes it is connected to, but that won't prevent those nodes from hearing about the transaction from another node that isn't refusing to relay it.

and in fact I thought that the nodes decide whether blocks are valid as well,

Again, solo miners and pools ARE nodes, so they get to decide for themselves which blocks they think are valid and which blocks they want to include in their own blockchains.  Every node maintains ITS OWN blockchain and if it decides a block is valid it includes the block in its own blockchain. A node CAN refuse to relay a block to the nodes it is connected to if it feels that block is invalid, but that won't prevent those nodes from hearing about the block from another node that isn't refusing to relay it.

so even if the miners do something crazy isn't it the nodes that are the ultimate deciders?

If an overwhelming majority of all nodes (users, wallets, exchanges, block explorers, miners, merchants, etc) ALL refuse to accept something, then it can be blocked (since there won't be enough remaining nodes or hashpower to effectively relay the information, and there won't be any economic activity aware of the information).  If a significant minority refuse to participate with the rest of the nodes, then a split can occur.

I thought that the miners are relatively irrelevant compared to the nodes because even if a miner has 1000x the hashing power of everybody else, if the nodes blackball the blocks from that miner then the miner will be ignored, so all their hashing power is useless.

If a miner (or pool) refuses to put anything in their block that identifies them, then it is impossible for nodes to know who mined the block.  If that miner with 1000x the hash power of the rest of the world is creating blocks that follow the same rules and everyone else, how would they know which blocks to "blackball"?

Even if you compute a block first, if the nodes reject your block then you control nothing, at least that is what I thought. No?

If ALL of the nodes reject your block?  Sure, you've got nothing.  The devil's in the details, and you haven't explained anything about the sort of attack you're trying to understand.  Explaining where the issues are is not going to be possible without a better understanding of what your concern is.