Bitcoin Forum
March 28, 2024, 04:16:50 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 26.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Does Satoshis' absence make bitcoin truly decentralized?  (Read 672 times)
Marcel666 (OP)
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 266
Merit: 2

The Premier Digital Asset Management Ecosystem


View Profile
October 06, 2018, 04:09:07 PM
 #1

Ethereum founder Vitalek Buletin recently expressed his intention to step back from the helms as he believes the protocol can now run spontaneously without his presence, https://dailyhodl.com/2018/10/05/vitalik-buterin-preparing-to-detach-himself-from-ethereum-says-platform-can-run-without-him/

I feel the absence of the creator makes the system truly decentralized and it can't be regarded as a financial pyramid.
Satoshi as the creator could have serious effect on the bitcoin market if he wasn't anonymous. His catching a cold and being filmed at the clinic could easily spark panic and FUD.
Now the community are the ones who control the market and support the technology.

||   ICONIQ HOLDING   ||
The Premier Digital Asset Management Ecosystem, Powered by the ICNQ Token
1711642610
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711642610

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711642610
Reply with quote  #2

1711642610
Report to moderator
1711642610
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711642610

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711642610
Reply with quote  #2

1711642610
Report to moderator
"In a nutshell, the network works like a distributed timestamp server, stamping the first transaction to spend a coin. It takes advantage of the nature of information being easy to spread but hard to stifle." -- Satoshi
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1711642610
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711642610

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711642610
Reply with quote  #2

1711642610
Report to moderator
franky1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4172
Merit: 4357



View Profile
October 06, 2018, 04:36:42 PM
 #2

satoshi left because he didnt want to be a point of refernce/decision. he wanted consensus to decide.

but bitcoin core replaced it and has been the thing people point to as the CORE, reference, decision, roadmap, moderated proposal route for all things bitcoin network

having mandated upgrades and moderation and treating other client software as the enemy that needs to be rekt or distorted as enemy until the only option is to altcoin those other clients off the network.. then its not decentralised.
claiming there are other full nodes is flimsy at best as they just blindly follow core

we need to get back to a level playing field where multiple pieces of full node full validating full archival software all have equal level as core.

core, if it wants to be a reference client should only run current rules. and then let the community separately on their own have their own proposals. where they communicate to each other and if a feature is good and wanted then all the versions add it. and the feature gets activated when the community of various versions all have consensus.

core need to back off with the monarchy mindset. all the core devs should have their own releases and all contribute to what the community want. not a small pool of devs who demand users blindly follow one roadmap and treat anything else as a bad actor.

if some feature/software is bad, people just dont run it. simple. but to campaign that there should only be one and anything has to follow.. is not decentralised.

core should be P-1 not p+1 (p=proposal). you know where cor is just the blue print of basic design. and others then build ontop separately

I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER.
Please do your own research & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. many people replying with insults but no on-topic content substance, automatically are 'facepalmed' and yawned at
alex_gr_cc
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 322
Merit: 1


View Profile WWW
October 06, 2018, 06:55:38 PM
 #3

Although creators play an important role in the life of each cryptocurrency, not only creators can influence them. Each major owner of a cryptocurrency can raise the hype in the media to their advantage. The market is very receptive to the news.

GigTricks
WORLD FIRST INTEGRATED FREELANCE & ON-DEMAND ECOSYSTEMS
WHITEPAPER | BOUNTY | ANN THREAD
www.gigtricks.io
gentlemand
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2590
Merit: 3008


Welt Am Draht


View Profile
October 06, 2018, 07:40:09 PM
 #4

It was his contribution to decentralisation. That does not mean it automatically prevents some other centralising influence arriving. It does set a precedent though and something for other people to look and commit to.

It's a tad tragic how little effort is put towards it elsewhere to the extent now that if you want a Binance listing you have to provide some coin contact number in case of problems. That means Bitcoin would not be able to get on Binance these days.
pawel7777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2394
Merit: 1554



View Profile WWW
October 06, 2018, 08:10:01 PM
 #5

Ethereum founder Vitalek Buletin recently expressed his intention to step back from the helms as he believes the protocol can now run spontaneously without his presence

Vitaleek Bulletin didn't quite 'express his intention', he: 1- acknowledged that at some point he will take the back seat, 2- pointed out that network can already function without him.

You made it sound like he's about to quit, which isn't the case.

I feel the absence of the creator makes the system truly decentralized and it can't be regarded as a financial pyramid.
...

Presence or absence of creator has nothing to do with decentralisation and/or legitimacy.

▄▄███████▄▄
▄██████████████▄
▄██████████████████▄
▄████▀▀▀▀███▀▀▀▀█████▄
▄█████████████▄█▀████▄
███████████▄███████████
██████████▄█▀███████████
██████████▀████████████
▀█████▄█▀█████████████▀
▀████▄▄▄▄███▄▄▄▄████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀███████████████▀
▀▀███████▀▀
.
 MΞTAWIN  THE FIRST WEB3 CASINO   
.
.. PLAY NOW ..
gowobonyok
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 2


View Profile
October 08, 2018, 02:02:12 AM
 #6

yes it makes sense, when the crypto founder is absent, making the coin does not have a founder or who has the number 1 authority to control the coin.
antonhuda
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 308
Merit: 11


View Profile
October 08, 2018, 03:31:05 AM
 #7

In the article, Vitalek Buletin gives ethereum the confidence to be more developed, even though without it this should be better. Seeing this situation, surely the community is able to put ethereum better. I think it will continue to run well and have a safe value.
pooya87
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3402
Merit: 10433



View Profile
October 08, 2018, 03:34:31 AM
 #8

Ethereum founder Vitalek Buletin ~~
I feel the absence of the creator makes the system truly decentralized and it can't be regarded as a financial pyramid.

i don't see it that way. specially when it comes to an already centralized altcoin such as Ethereum. Vitalik came and created ETH and used it to make millions of dollars with its premine and pump and dumps. he clearly knows that the system has a lot of flaws in it some of which can not be fixed at all. and the system is doomed to fail eventually in the long run. this to me seems like he doesn't want to be around when that happens!

..JAMBLER.io..Create Your Bitcoin Mixing
Business Now for   F R E E 
▄█████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
████▀████████████████████
███▀█████▄█▀███▀▀▀██████
██▀█████▄█▄██████████████
██▄▄████▀▄▄▄▀▀▀▀▀▄▄██████
█████▄▄▄██████████▀▄████
█████▀▄█▄██████▀█▄█████
███████▀▄█▀█▄██▀█▄███████
█████████▄█▀▄█▀▄█████████
█████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
▀█████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████████████████████████
.
      OUR      
PARTNERS

.
█████████████████████████████████████████████████
████▄
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
████▀
▄█████████████████████████████
████████▀▀█████▀▀████████
█████▀█████████████▀█████
████████████████████████
███████████████▄█████████
█████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
███████████████▀█████████
████████████████████████
█████▄█████████████▄█████
████████▄▄█████▄▄████████
▀█████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████████████████████████
.
   INVEST   
BITCOIN

.
█████████████████████████████████████████████████
████▄
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
████▀
ngm22585
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 84
Merit: 1


View Profile
October 08, 2018, 03:45:11 AM
 #9

It was his contribution to decentralisation. That does not mean it automatically prevents some other centralising influence arriving. It does set a precedent though and something for other people to look and commit to.

It's a tad tragic how little effort is put towards it elsewhere to the extent now that if you want a Binance listing you have to provide some coin contact number in case of problems. That means Bitcoin would not be able to get on Binance these days.

Well said, and agreed.
coinwizard_
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 5

Most Advanced Crypto Exchange on the Blockchain


View Profile
October 08, 2018, 06:54:20 AM
 #10

Decentralisation doesn't guarantee the success of a coin, just take a look at ripple which is vying for the number two spot. Litecoin survived without charlie lee and ethereum will carry on without vitalik

CRYPTOCIRCLEX | THE MOST ADVANCED CRYPTO EXCHANGE ON THE BLOCKCHAIN
✪╠════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╣✪
Legendari
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 266
Merit: 100



View Profile
October 08, 2018, 06:56:34 AM
 #11

I think you're right. Satoshi's absence makes the community more independent and, as a result, more decentralized. It seems to me that this is the problem of Ethereum now, because it depends very much on Vitalik and therefore cannot be fully decentralized.

❤   humancoin   ❤   Join our whitelist!      ❤   humancoin   ❤
███████                  A new era of charity                    ███████
▄ ▄ ▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄  Telegram | Reddit | Medium | Twitter | ANN Thread | Facebook   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▄ ▄ ▄ ▄
Dany.dan
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 126
Merit: 0


View Profile
October 08, 2018, 07:19:21 AM
 #12

 Cryptocurrencies use decentralized control as opposed to centralized electronic money and central banking systems. The decentralized control of each cryptocurrency works through distributed ledger technology, typically a blockchain, that serves as a public financial transaction database.
audaciousbeing
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330
Merit: 569



View Profile
October 08, 2018, 07:26:53 AM
 #13

Ethereum founder Vitalek Buletin recently expressed his intention to step back from the helms as he believes the protocol can now run spontaneously without his presence, https://dailyhodl.com/2018/10/05/vitalik-buterin-preparing-to-detach-himself-from-ethereum-says-platform-can-run-without-him/

I feel the absence of the creator makes the system truly decentralized and it can't be regarded as a financial pyramid.
Satoshi as the creator could have serious effect on the bitcoin market if he wasn't anonymous. His catching a cold and being filmed at the clinic could easily spark panic and FUD.
Now the community are the ones who control the market and support the technology.

Being decentralized goes beyond a terminology but also being seen to be centralized. A system can claim to be just and fair but in the eyes of everybody, its just a term that is being used to deceive people for others to have their way. If Satoshi has been around, I believe strongly that despite the known fact that bitcoin is decentralized, it will still be subject to some conspiracy that there is some behind the scene control that is being done by Satoshi that would negate the decentralization principle which I think is one of the reasons that Vitalek is taking this position but I doubt the effect would be as effective as that of Satoshi because while Satoshi has been believed to be a nick name, that is his own real name and whether he likes it or not, reference would still be made to him till forever.
erox
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 308
Merit: 106



View Profile
October 08, 2018, 07:37:52 AM
 #14

I hope that Vitalik will indeed depart from the helm. For the last time, the fake news of his death brought down Ethereum by 30%! I think the publicity of the Creator is very bad for the coin. IMHO

NAVIBRATION  -  feel your way   |   The way of knowing the world, reinvented
▬▬   WHITEPAPER   :   ONE PAGER   ▶  WATCH INTRO
FACEBOOK   ●   TWITTER   ●   TELEGRAM   ●   LINKEDIN   ●   YOUTUBE
DooMAD
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3738
Merit: 3081


Leave no FUD unchallenged


View Profile
October 08, 2018, 07:20:59 PM
 #15

core, if it wants to be a reference client should only...
core need to...
core should be...

Wrong as usual. 

You don't get to dictate what any group should do or what they need to do.  That's not how Bitcoin works, Mr Authoritarian.  Everyone can do what they want.  You don't have to like it, but there is no obligation for them to do what you want them to do. 

..JAMBLER.io..Create Your Bitcoin Mixing
Business Now for   F R E E 
▄█████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
████▀████████████████████
███▀█████▄█▀███▀▀▀██████
██▀█████▄█▄██████████████
██▄▄████▀▄▄▄▀▀▀▀▀▄▄██████
█████▄▄▄██████████▀▄████
█████▀▄█▄██████▀█▄█████
███████▀▄█▀█▄██▀█▄███████
█████████▄█▀▄█▀▄█████████
█████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
▀█████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████████████████████████
.
      OUR      
PARTNERS

.
█████████████████████████████████████████████████
████▄
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
████▀
▄█████████████████████████████
████████▀▀█████▀▀████████
█████▀█████████████▀█████
████████████████████████
███████████████▄█████████
█████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
███████████████▀█████████
████████████████████████
█████▄█████████████▄█████
████████▄▄█████▄▄████████
▀█████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████████████████████████
.
   INVEST   
BITCOIN

.
█████████████████████████████████████████████████
████▄
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
████▀
pawel7777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2394
Merit: 1554



View Profile WWW
October 08, 2018, 09:31:42 PM
 #16

<snip>
You don't get to dictate what any group should do or what they need to do.  That's not how Bitcoin works, Mr Authoritarian.

And you don't get to forbid others to dictate/suggest what any group should do or what they need to do.  That's not how Bitcoin works...

We can do it all day long, or we could stick to the topics and stop projecting shit on others.

▄▄███████▄▄
▄██████████████▄
▄██████████████████▄
▄████▀▀▀▀███▀▀▀▀█████▄
▄█████████████▄█▀████▄
███████████▄███████████
██████████▄█▀███████████
██████████▀████████████
▀█████▄█▀█████████████▀
▀████▄▄▄▄███▄▄▄▄████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀███████████████▀
▀▀███████▀▀
.
 MΞTAWIN  THE FIRST WEB3 CASINO   
.
.. PLAY NOW ..
franky1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4172
Merit: 4357



View Profile
October 08, 2018, 10:43:59 PM
 #17

core, if it wants to be a reference client should only...
core need to...
core should be...

Wrong as usual.  

You don't get to dictate what any group should do or what they need to do.  That's not how Bitcoin works, Mr Authoritarian.  Everyone can do what they want.  You don't have to like it, but there is no obligation for them to do what you want them to do.  

read my footnote.
plus if you think im a dictator. i would be actually trying to DDos core. or rleased some client with some mandatory code.
yet im just saying my opinion. there have been many topics where you defend cores monarchy. i get that, you have a buddy system. cool for you
that doesnt mean others cant have opinions and call out the crap that occurs

there has only been one group that have actually acted with dictatorial methods. and you can guess who that is

if i see something wrong. ill call it out. but calling it out is not a dictatorship. its just calling it out.
im sorry if i upset your buddies, but calm down. its not like im the one that pushes out mandatory code changes that only had 35% community uptake before and after

I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER.
Please do your own research & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. many people replying with insults but no on-topic content substance, automatically are 'facepalmed' and yawned at
DooMAD
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3738
Merit: 3081


Leave no FUD unchallenged


View Profile
October 08, 2018, 11:38:44 PM
 #18

<snip>
You don't get to dictate what any group should do or what they need to do.  That's not how Bitcoin works, Mr Authoritarian.

And you don't get to forbid others to dictate/suggest what any group should do or what they need to do.  That's not how Bitcoin works...

We can do it all day long, or we could stick to the topics and stop projecting shit on others.

Back to the topic, then.  Do you get more decentralisation from a system one where no one is in a position of authority and there's no way to restrict others from creating the code they want to create?  Or a system where someone is in a position of authority and people can't create the code they want to create?  The general opinion presented in this topic so far is that Bitcoin is less centralised if there's no one in a position of authority and I agree with that.

Allude to my prior post being off-topic if you like, but I think it's quite salient to this particular discussion.  My point isn't that I want to forbid franky1 from trying to dictate things (because he's clearly free to fail at doing that all he likes).  The point is that while he claims he advocates a decentralised system where no one can restrict people from creating the code they want to create, his instinctive reaction to achieve that goal is to wish in vain that Core was restricted from creating the code they want to create (which could only happen if Bitcoin was more centralised and someone was in a position to enforce that).  I honestly don't see the harm in pointing out both the futility and the hypocrisy in that stance.

Bitcoin doesn't have centralised development or a "monarchy", it just happens to have a particular group of developers where many users choose to run that client because they believe it to be the best code available in the current market.  Consensus hasn't been "replaced" and it's still the users who ultimately decide what that consensus is.  There are no "mandatory code changes", there are only the rules enforced by the protocol (and again, it's the users who decide what those rules are).  The only way Bitcoin could work as franky1 describes is if it was more centralised.  

..JAMBLER.io..Create Your Bitcoin Mixing
Business Now for   F R E E 
▄█████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
████▀████████████████████
███▀█████▄█▀███▀▀▀██████
██▀█████▄█▄██████████████
██▄▄████▀▄▄▄▀▀▀▀▀▄▄██████
█████▄▄▄██████████▀▄████
█████▀▄█▄██████▀█▄█████
███████▀▄█▀█▄██▀█▄███████
█████████▄█▀▄█▀▄█████████
█████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
▀█████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████████████████████████
.
      OUR      
PARTNERS

.
█████████████████████████████████████████████████
████▄
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
████▀
▄█████████████████████████████
████████▀▀█████▀▀████████
█████▀█████████████▀█████
████████████████████████
███████████████▄█████████
█████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
███████████████▀█████████
████████████████████████
█████▄█████████████▄█████
████████▄▄█████▄▄████████
▀█████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████████████████████████
.
   INVEST   
BITCOIN

.
█████████████████████████████████████████████████
████▄
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
████▀
dothebeats
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3598
Merit: 1352


Excel is fun


View Profile
October 09, 2018, 01:24:23 AM
 #19

In the first place Satoshi didn't want to use his 'power' to affect the network as he wants the community to come up with solutions of their own and let consensus pave the way for a better bitcoin. As what he always says, bitcoin is free from any central authority, and the community can always create what they think is the better version of bitcoin, hence why forks occur. Also, any 'head' of a coin somewhat gets the 'authoritative' status and any remarks/comments they make has a huge effect on the coin and the markets as well, so it's better for any coin to not have a central figure IMO.

▄▄███████▄▄
▄██████████████▄
▄██████████████████▄
▄████▀▀▀▀███▀▀▀▀█████▄
▄█████████████▄█▀████▄
███████████▄███████████
██████████▄█▀███████████
██████████▀████████████
▀█████▄█▀█████████████▀
▀████▄▄▄▄███▄▄▄▄████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀███████████████▀
▀▀███████▀▀
.
 MΞTAWIN  THE FIRST WEB3 CASINO   
.
.. PLAY NOW ..
franky1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4172
Merit: 4357



View Profile
October 09, 2018, 01:48:14 AM
Last edit: October 09, 2018, 01:59:12 AM by franky1
 #20

doomad

your defending core. not bitcoin
if you cared for bitcoin as a decentralised network. you would not care or need to worry or need to defend core. because core would not need defending

its not about restricting code they want. its about the code they want IS restricting others

do you see any code i wrote restricting core? no? ooooo so im not dictating code
do you see any bips i wrote that include mandatory activation dates? no? oooo so im not dictating anything mandatory
do you see any code i wrote that throws core off the network or makes core none functional? no? ooo because im not doing that

but look WHO is and look WHO you are defending
core have bips with mandatory activation. those bips have been used
core have code that restricts other nodes from doing things previously possible by non core nodes.
core have code that has thrown nodes off the network purely because they were not wanting the core roadmap

you are not defending a WHAT(network) you are defending a WHO(group of devs)
atleast recognise the difference and realise that you are not defending bitcoin but you are defending core.

in the last 9 years it has only been core devs and their buddies that have lead REKT campaigns. only core devs and their buddies that have supported mandatory activations and only core devs and their buddies that have added code to throw certain nodes off the network

as for user choice. show me a proper full validation, full archival, full node that is in no way affiliated with following the core roadmap, that offers their own community BIP gatway where users can offer suggestions of possible future features..
that does not involve moderated hop skip and jump(3 moderated venues to pass) to even get a chance to vetted into a client software

over many many many discussions i have used the term 'we need to go back to a LEVEL PLAYING FIELD of multiple implementations'.
why are you so afraid of that notion? does it go against your buddys roadplan?

I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER.
Please do your own research & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. many people replying with insults but no on-topic content substance, automatically are 'facepalmed' and yawned at
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »  All
  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!