Bitcoin Forum
June 15, 2024, 07:46:43 AM *
News: Voting for pizza day contest
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: Which is the best kind of centralisation?
Centralisation of nodes and mining (BU) - 0 (0%)
Centralisation of transactions and mining (SegWit + LN) - 0 (0%)
Centralisation of users and mining (no change) - 0 (0%)
Centralisation of supply and developers (ETH) - 0 (0%)
Total Voters: 0

Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Which kind of centralisation is best?  (Read 286 times)
Iranus (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 535


Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform


View Profile
April 25, 2017, 03:36:18 PM
 #1

After having a look at how desperate everyone is for each viewpoint to go through, I've concluded that in all situations they're arguing for a type of centralisation and against another type of centralisation.

BU's increased amount of data on the blockchain means that running full nodes would become impractical for ordinary users as the amount of Bitcoin transactions would increase much faster than how much data Bitcoin users are willing to download to run a full node.

The Lightning Network (a potential development of SegWit) would result in transactions being done largely offchain and essentially centralised into huge transactions.

Staying as we are now without scaling would result in the centralisation of users because it won't be practical for people to spend any small transactions on the Bitcoin network, therefore making the users have to be wealthier.

Switching to Ethereum would equate to acceptance of a centralised development team without a real immutable/high-consensus based network and would also mean that the supply of new money can be controlled, removing Bitcoin's scarcity.

What's your favourite kind of centralisation?

..Stake.com..   ▄████████████████████████████████████▄
   ██ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄            ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ██  ▄████▄
   ██ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ██████████ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ██  ██████
   ██ ██████████ ██      ██ ██████████ ██   ▀██▀
   ██ ██      ██ ██████  ██ ██      ██ ██    ██
   ██ ██████  ██ █████  ███ ██████  ██ ████▄ ██
   ██ █████  ███ ████  ████ █████  ███ ████████
   ██ ████  ████ ██████████ ████  ████ ████▀
   ██ ██████████ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ██████████ ██
   ██            ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀            ██ 
   ▀█████████▀ ▄████████████▄ ▀█████████▀
  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███  ██  ██  ███▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
 ██████████████████████████████████████████
▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄
█  ▄▀▄             █▀▀█▀▄▄
█  █▀█             █  ▐  ▐▌
█       ▄██▄       █  ▌  █
█     ▄██████▄     █  ▌ ▐▌
█    ██████████    █ ▐  █
█   ▐██████████▌   █ ▐ ▐▌
█    ▀▀██████▀▀    █ ▌ █
█     ▄▄▄██▄▄▄     █ ▌▐▌
█                  █▐ █
█                  █▐▐▌
█                  █▐█
▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀█
▄▄█████████▄▄
▄██▀▀▀▀█████▀▀▀▀██▄
▄█▀       ▐█▌       ▀█▄
██         ▐█▌         ██
████▄     ▄█████▄     ▄████
████████▄███████████▄████████
███▀    █████████████    ▀███
██       ███████████       ██
▀█▄       █████████       ▄█▀
▀█▄    ▄██▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██▄  ▄▄▄█▀
▀███████         ███████▀
▀█████▄       ▄█████▀
▀▀▀███▄▄▄███▀▀▀
..PLAY NOW..
unamis76
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512
Merit: 1009


View Profile
April 25, 2017, 03:40:57 PM
 #2

No centralization is good or "the best kind".

BU's increased amount of data on the blockchain means that running full nodes would become impractical for ordinary users as the amount of Bitcoin transactions would increase much faster than how much data Bitcoin users are willing to download to run a full node.

The blockchain isn't going to skyrocket in size or have way more transactions overnight.
Kprawn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1074


View Profile
April 25, 2017, 04:00:51 PM
 #3

What about you add .... centralization when people opt to use centralized services to bypass the limitations of Bitcoin. Example : Xapo

Some people will still use "centralized" services, no matter what happens to address the scaling problems. We will see people using off-chain

solutions to overcome Bitcoin's limitations. We will never get away without some centralization coming into play. { centralized wallet providers or

Bitcoin exchanges.... you name it. }  Roll Eyes

THE FIRST DECENTRALIZED & PLAYER-OWNED CASINO
.EARNBET..EARN BITCOIN: DIVIDENDS
FOR-LIFETIME & MUCH MORE.
. BET WITH: BTCETHEOSLTCBCHWAXXRPBNB
.JOIN US: GITLABTWITTERTELEGRAM
Iranus (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 535


Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform


View Profile
April 25, 2017, 04:04:11 PM
 #4

No centralization is good or "the best kind".
My point is that every time openly talks about how terrible someone else's solution is, they ignore their own.  There are flaws in all of them and they all lead to some kind of centralisation.  That's the light people should be viewing this in.
BU's increased amount of data on the blockchain means that running full nodes would become impractical for ordinary users as the amount of Bitcoin transactions would increase much faster than how much data Bitcoin users are willing to download to run a full node.
The blockchain isn't going to skyrocket in size or have way more transactions overnight.
The amount of transactions on the network has been steadily rising for a long time.  If transactions are more convenient, the transaction volume will rise faster.  If it's on the LN it won't result in it being harder to run full nodes, but the LN's transactions themselves are centralised.

..Stake.com..   ▄████████████████████████████████████▄
   ██ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄            ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ██  ▄████▄
   ██ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ██████████ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ██  ██████
   ██ ██████████ ██      ██ ██████████ ██   ▀██▀
   ██ ██      ██ ██████  ██ ██      ██ ██    ██
   ██ ██████  ██ █████  ███ ██████  ██ ████▄ ██
   ██ █████  ███ ████  ████ █████  ███ ████████
   ██ ████  ████ ██████████ ████  ████ ████▀
   ██ ██████████ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ██████████ ██
   ██            ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀            ██ 
   ▀█████████▀ ▄████████████▄ ▀█████████▀
  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███  ██  ██  ███▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
 ██████████████████████████████████████████
▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄
█  ▄▀▄             █▀▀█▀▄▄
█  █▀█             █  ▐  ▐▌
█       ▄██▄       █  ▌  █
█     ▄██████▄     █  ▌ ▐▌
█    ██████████    █ ▐  █
█   ▐██████████▌   █ ▐ ▐▌
█    ▀▀██████▀▀    █ ▌ █
█     ▄▄▄██▄▄▄     █ ▌▐▌
█                  █▐ █
█                  █▐▐▌
█                  █▐█
▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀█
▄▄█████████▄▄
▄██▀▀▀▀█████▀▀▀▀██▄
▄█▀       ▐█▌       ▀█▄
██         ▐█▌         ██
████▄     ▄█████▄     ▄████
████████▄███████████▄████████
███▀    █████████████    ▀███
██       ███████████       ██
▀█▄       █████████       ▄█▀
▀█▄    ▄██▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██▄  ▄▄▄█▀
▀███████         ███████▀
▀█████▄       ▄█████▀
▀▀▀███▄▄▄███▀▀▀
..PLAY NOW..
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!