Is Bitcoin really still decentralized??

[bitbunnny]

Due to large mining farm and big whales, I guess the decentralized property of bitcoin ecosystem will not get disturbed. Let's look into what are basic decentralization, we are enjoying with bitcoins, for example,  no one issues bitcoins - no one able to freeze our BTC savings - value is not depending on one or any government's policy; I guess nothing of these get disturbed due to whales or mining farms as far as I understand.

If these whales or mining farms are able to alter the total supply of bitcoin or able to double spend or working on 51% attack or trying to chargeback btc payments then we can start saying that bitcoin is no more decentralized as its basic things are getting changed due to some people.

Exactly, Bitcoin isn't under influence of any government or central authority. But does only that really makes is decentralized and independent?
Here on forum we see claims all the time, comming from community that whales are designing Bitcoin price and manipulating the market. That is totaly oposite to origin idea of Bitcoin and I'm not sure that Bitcoin is so decentralized as some like to believe.
Maybe there isn't formal centralized authority that controls Bitcoin but it seems that whales tend to do that. Or is this just a legend?

[Gumpfire]

Miners own mining, they don't own Bitcoin's protocol or Bitcoin network or Bitcoin community. Miners don't influence the price in any special way, and there's also no solid proof that anyone successfully manipulates the price on a large scale, it's just rumors of frustrated traders who lose their money doing bad trades.

Bitcoin is still the most decentralized cryptocurrency, because it has the biggest network and community and the most decentralized development with hundreds of contributors.

One of the main reasons why bitcoin and crypto users have stopped using it is because of misinformation and misinterpretation of what's happening inside the cryptoworld. If we read more articles about it, we will be more knowledgeable and there will be no more confusions regarding this topic.

To clear things out, bitcoin is decentralized and there is no way that those miners will have control of it.

[RealMalatesta]

You're getting it wrong, Bitcoin is decentralized but most of the exchanges that we all know today are centralized. So these exchanges are the ones that made everything seem like it's centralized.

There are decentralized exchanges, but people are not interested in making use of these decentralized exchanges because some of them thinks that they are difficult to use and there is no protection in place since you're trading p2p, unlike centralized exchanges like Binance where they act as the middlemen and carry out the trades themselves to protect their traders from the getting scammed; one of the advantage of using centralized exchanges. So, there is nothing like Bitcoin being centralized, it is decentralized except for exchanges, and not all exchanges are centralized.

[Sanugarid]

bitcoin will always decentralized because that is how this designed and the function as well,yeah there are some issues but not enough for bitcoin to be called centralized mate.

Bitcoin still decentralized because so far the are different miners sharing a percentage lower than 51% of the network, BTC will continue decentralized because more investors are buying it. with the halving, there will be fewer rewards for miners which will make it more difficult for small companies or individuals to acquire a big piece of cake, because of a higher price of hash mining power.

i am just thinking how could be there issues about Bitcoin is becoming centralized?can some others clarify this things?

we have been here for long and the reason is decentralization and privacy right?

Good point but maybe they are thinking that government can give some taxes if that happens but I think it is still not. The possibility of the bitcoin being centralized is too low as of now. Bitcoin is a digital money and the internet is a wide area network, it is decentralized also so bitcoin is. The government can only ban or legalize the usage of bitcoin but I dont think they can really enter into this just to get some taxes.

You're getting it wrong, Bitcoin is decentralized but most of the exchanges that we all know today are centralized. So these exchanges are the ones that made everything seem like it's centralized.

There are decentralized exchanges, but people are not interested in making use of these decentralized exchanges because some of them thinks that they are difficult to use and there is no protection in place since you're trading p2p, unlike centralized exchanges like Binance where they act as the middlemen and carry out the trades themselves to protect their traders from the getting scammed; one of the advantage of using centralized exchanges. So, there is nothing like Bitcoin being centralized, it is decentralized except for exchanges, and not all exchanges are centralized.

Indeed, the exchangers are centralized but still government cannot collect some taxes right? So do not be afraid if the bitcoin becomes centralized but it is maybe a good thing for us if that actually happens. Just wsit to the most awaited halving can happen this year.

[Kelvinid]

You're getting it wrong, Bitcoin is decentralized but most of the exchanges that we all know today are centralized. So these exchanges are the ones that made everything seem like it's centralized.

And we say that these exchanges are trying to manipulate the market and turning Bitcoin away from being decentralized...that was likely to happen in the coming days. That is why we could think sometimes that whales are now controlling in the market because everything will be changed once they move their funds.

I hope it won't go that way, we'd love to keep bitcoin being in decentralize but we can't also deny that some people are so greedy that would like to control the market. Things can be changed as the journey continues, and whatever it is I'm still supporting Bitcoin.

[finaleshot2016]

Ofcourse!

Bitcoin is decentralized and it's already proven due to many transactions that occured in blockchain. Bitcoin is getting centralized when there are third party platforms that manipulates the market to change the current price value.

That's why, DEX are still good and the most reliable exchange for me.

[hatshepsut93]

Shouldn't the question be, is bitcoin still centralised? Because, Bitcoiner as I am, and as un-technical as I can be, it's impossible to deny Bitcoin started out centralised -- but that's just the nature of something that has to come out from somewhere and be born. The software was run first by one, then two people, and then a handful of pre-early adopters. Might even have been dominated by a few developers and enthusiasts a year after, still centralised. They were the users, the miners, the developers.

It's nothing like that today, hasn't been for many years. Even the first user, the first centraliser, the founder -- he walked away so this dream of decentralisation could happen.

I think it's a really wrong way of thinking about it, Bitcoin's protocol didn't suffer any major changes since Satoshi's initial release, there were only updates and fixes. Small peer-to-peer network and centralized network are not the same, even in early days Bitcoin gave its users full control over their money. So what that there was less developers, you could always choose to not follow their version and stay on the old chain in case of hard fork, or follow some other developers.

[buwaytress]

Shouldn't the question be, is bitcoin still centralised? Because, Bitcoiner as I am, and as un-technical as I can be, it's impossible to deny Bitcoin started out centralised -- but that's just the nature of something that has to come out from somewhere and be born. The software was run first by one, then two people, and then a handful of pre-early adopters. Might even have been dominated by a few developers and enthusiasts a year after, still centralised. They were the users, the miners, the developers.

It's nothing like that today, hasn't been for many years. Even the first user, the first centraliser, the founder -- he walked away so this dream of decentralisation could happen.

I think it's a really wrong way of thinking about it, Bitcoin's protocol didn't suffer any major changes since Satoshi's initial release, there were only updates and fixes. Small peer-to-peer network and centralized network are not the same, even in early days Bitcoin gave its users full control over their money. So what that there was less developers, you could always choose to not follow their version and stay on the old chain in case of hard fork, or follow some other developers.

Wrong or not -- and I use Bitcoin and want it to succeed even more than it already has -- but if you had a few guys who knew each other mining, securing and developing it, it was centralised. What do you mean "suffer any major changes"? Why is change a bad thing if consensus is achieved? And if it was change the few wanted, they would have gotten.

Don't see my comment as a criticism. It's the unavoidable reality that you can't help but centralise it at the beginning. That Satoshi, Finney et al were all willing to work without malice was incredible. I totally agree that Bitcoin never had a centralised architecture, but politically, until more peers joined the network, it was. This isn't a criticism, it's just the way it was.

[Hafidznewbie]

Theoretically Bitcoin is decentralized. But now a big sums of Bitcoin are collected in the hands of big cryptocurrency exchanges and big mining pools. So it is really difficult to say about fully decentralization of Bitcoin. For simple miners now it is possible only mine through a mining pool, so no wonder that the big sums of Bitcoin are collected in the biggest mining pools.

[microsurfer]

If we are talkin about mining power - bitcoin is more centralized than even before.
And exchanges are graet points of finance centralization

[Meowth05]

After the years in trading Bitcoin it came more and more clear to me that Bitcoin is technically not decentralized anymore... its mainly owned by huge mining farms or early adopters who are able to manipulate the market at will, many exchanges playing with Bitcoin and Altcoins by making fools out of the normal Joe who wants to enter the Crypto world, i know many here will think that you should be ready and get informed before taking any step into the crypto world, but does it not bother anyone that some people are enriching them self by kicking the crap out of your wallets??


Bitcoin Mining is dead unless you own a mining farm with the necessary hashrate, again only big companies having access to Bitcoin!!!


What is your thought about this??

First of all, Bitcoin mining isn't dead and if it does there will be an impact on Bitcoin circulation. Not gonna lie whales, miners whatever they are, do have big part in manipulating the market but this not necessarily mean they got the crypto market entirely.It is decentralized simply because everyone is free to make transaction without involvement of third parties.

[Dabs]

Mining has always converged into several big mining pools. Pools are made up of individual miners. In a sense, each pool is made up of decentralized miners.

To keep themselves in check, pools attempt not to get too much of the total hashpower of the entire network. There are several so they can easily divide and not get more than say 30% of the network.

If you go here, you can see the current pool distribution: https://www.blockchain.com/pools

It would look like this:




Still, while it looks like only a few pools dominate, they will self-regulate and never get too large a share. In theory, they can, but people are just going to disconnect their miners and go to a different pool.

[USBitcoinServices.Com]

Miners own mining, they don't own Bitcoin's protocol or Bitcoin network or Bitcoin community. Miners don't influence the price in any special way, and there's also no solid proof that anyone successfully manipulates the price on a large scale, it's just rumors of frustrated traders who lose their money doing bad trades.

Bitcoin is still the most decentralized cryptocurrency, because it has the biggest network and community and the most decentralized development with hundreds of contributors.

One of the main reasons why bitcoin and crypto users have stopped using it is because of misinformation and misinterpretation of what's happening inside the cryptoworld. If we read more articles about it, we will be more knowledgeable and there will be no more confusions regarding this topic.

To clear things out, bitcoin is decentralized and there is no way that those miners will have control of it.

As we know the mainstream media has been spreading poor and misinformation about bitcoin and other cryptos. People need to read some good sources of information and avoid mainstream media which their business is basically to misinform to society, their goal is to profit from telling lies, people need to stop watching any centralized media.

[TIDOVEE]

After the years in trading Bitcoin it came more and more clear to me that Bitcoin is technically not decentralized anymore... its mainly owned by huge mining farms or early adopters who are able to manipulate the market at will, many exchanges playing with Bitcoin and Altcoins by making fools out of the normal Joe who wants to enter the Crypto world, i know many here will think that you should be ready and get informed before taking any step into the crypto world, but does it not bother anyone that some people are enriching them self by kicking the crap out of your wallets??


Bitcoin Mining is dead unless you own a mining farm with the necessary hashrate, again only big companies having access to Bitcoin!!!


What is your thought about this??

It only look as you have said, but it is not so, I have  some times thought it doubtfully if the decentralized character of bitcoin is still valid, considering some influence of certain nations or people on the market value, but I later understood that there are certain people who much manage the market, mining and updates and they are not spirits or Angels. As you can see on this platform, there are executives who manages our posts,being decentralized will make anyonr else be part of them without descrimination.

[Debonaire217]

Theoretically Bitcoin is decentralized. But now a big sums of Bitcoin are collected in the hands of big cryptocurrency exchanges and big mining pools. So it is really difficult to say about fully decentralization of Bitcoin. For simple miners now it is possible only mine through a mining pool, so no wonder that the big sums of Bitcoin are collected in the biggest mining pools.

This is when we are to adopt to the systems of cryptocurrency centralized exchanges. In the first place, we have the option to choose whether to store our cryptocurreny to exchanges or store it in the safest wallet possible which are hardware wallets. In addition, mining pool for miners isn't set by the exchanges, there are still bitcoin that hasn't been mined and that is where the reward of the miners came form. Lastly, being decentralized is what bitcoin freely offers, if you don't want this characteristics, then it's up to you not to trust exchanges mostly those that requires KYC.

[shield132]

Shouldn't the question be, is bitcoin still centralised? Because, Bitcoiner as I am, and as un-technical as I can be, it's impossible to deny Bitcoin started out centralised -- but that's just the nature of something that has to come out from somewhere and be born. The software was run first by one, then two people, and then a handful of pre-early adopters. Might even have been dominated by a few developers and enthusiasts a year after, still centralised. They were the users, the miners, the developers.

It's nothing like that today, hasn't been for many years. Even the first user, the first centraliser, the founder -- he walked away so this dream of decentralisation could happen.

Really liked your post, yeah, bitcoin was centralized at first, there is no doubt but to my mind bitcoin had sweet spot in 2011-2012 years and even till 2016. Then some things went well and opposite. Nowadays bitcoin isn't decentralized, at least I think so and have enough arguments for that. Governments are going to set regulations on it, exchanges hold almost 10% of whole bitcoin supply and as time goes number increases. Mining turned into business cause mining at home isn't beneficial at all. And for example we see shady behaviors of Bitmain that releases novel miners after getting most out of it.

[julius caesar]

Bitcoin is still decentralized. You can just check the price movement of it and the transaction fee that it offers. It is not controlled by the government back then. As of now, people think that bitcoin is now controlled by the government since some of the other countries set the rules and regulation about it. Little did they know that it does not affect bitcoin at all. It will move freely no matter what happens.

[redsun114]

Shouldn't the question be, is bitcoin still centralised? Because, Bitcoiner as I am, and as un-technical as I can be, it's impossible to deny Bitcoin started out centralised -- but that's just the nature of something that has to come out from somewhere and be born. The software was run first by one, then two people, and then a handful of pre-early adopters. Might even have been dominated by a few developers and enthusiasts a year after, still centralised. They were the users, the miners, the developers.

It's nothing like that today, hasn't been for many years. Even the first user, the first centraliser, the founder -- he walked away so this dream of decentralisation could happen.

You sound like complete different from what is my understanding on decentralization. Even, when only one person was using bitcoin it was still a decentralized one because the mining reward belongs to anyone who has more hash power (the second person may join at any time and the first person has no authority to stop the 2nd one from joining). I mean to say we need to consider what are the things which define decentralization within bitcoins: the production of bitcoin is not controlled by an individual nor by a group and no one got power to revert/charge-back a transaction or to freeze an address and its balance. I strongly believe these are the features which define that bitcoin is a decentralized and definitely not by how many users/miners/developers are involving.

Regardless of 1 or 1000s of people involving, the feature I have mentioned will not get changed. So, it is always decentralized so far. Without identifying what belongs to decentralized, it will not make sense debating whether it is still decentralized or not.

[buwaytress]

Shouldn't the question be, is bitcoin still centralised? Because, Bitcoiner as I am, and as un-technical as I can be, it's impossible to deny Bitcoin started out centralised -- but that's just the nature of something that has to come out from somewhere and be born. The software was run first by one, then two people, and then a handful of pre-early adopters. Might even have been dominated by a few developers and enthusiasts a year after, still centralised. They were the users, the miners, the developers.

It's nothing like that today, hasn't been for many years. Even the first user, the first centraliser, the founder -- he walked away so this dream of decentralisation could happen.

You sound like complete different from what is my understanding on decentralization. Even, when only one person was using bitcoin it was still a decentralized one because the mining reward belongs to anyone who has more hash power (the second person may join at any time and the first person has no authority to stop the 2nd one from joining). I mean to say we need to consider what are the things which define decentralization within bitcoins: the production of bitcoin is not controlled by an individual nor by a group and no one got power to revert/charge-back a transaction or to freeze an address and its balance. I strongly believe these are the features which define that bitcoin is a decentralized and definitely not by how many users/miners/developers are involving.

Regardless of 1 or 1000s of people involving, the feature I have mentioned will not get changed. So, it is always decentralized so far. Without identifying what belongs to decentralized, it will not make sense debating whether it is still decentralized or not.

You missed my second response which was about the political centralisation, rather than the architecture (which, mind you, if operated by 1 or 2 people still means the decisions would be made by them).

You talk about only 1 person using bitcoin but you have to remember that 1 person at the time had also to run the actual client, full node and verify the transactions and include it into the new blocks. Imagine a theoretical today, where only 1 person was doing that on a full node. if 1 million new users theoretically today only join only as users, and that one guy decides to shut down his computer, you're not going to get magic blocks every 10 minutes.

Anyway, there's even enough evidence without going to the extremes of Satoshi or Hal Finney sitting alone firing up the network to demonstrate that Bitcoin was centralised at first.

A mining company called Ghash in 2014 found themselves unwittingly in ownership of "powers that circumvented the decentralisation" when their mining pool got so popular they crossed the 51% hashrate threshold several times. I wasn't around at the time, but they apparently voluntary shut down to prevent this.

Again, I'm totally saying Bitcoin is decentralised today. But this privilege did not come without challenges, nor should it ever be taken for granted.

[vapourminer]

A mining company called Ghash in 2014 found themselves unwittingly in ownership of "powers that circumvented the decentralisation" when their mining pool got so popular they crossed the 51% hashrate threshold several times. I wasn't around at the time, but they apparently voluntary shut down to prevent this.

some decent drama and doom about that iirc. i usually was at other pools but i do remember reordering my failover pool list to prevent me joining ghash if my main pool went down. so it was last in the list, so maybe not preventing my joining but only as a last resort.

enough miners figured they would just switch away if ghash got too carried away that i wasnt worried.

i dont recall how exactly how ghash handled it. prevented new miners from joining sounds familiar.. but cant remember.