Bitcoin & Centralization

[Amel]

Centralization to me is not within the shareholders, but instead in the nodes that run the network, which is.more of a concern to me rather than these whales. China has established a centralized network of nodes, consisting of more than 50% of the network. And outright ban by the Chinese government would bring adverse impact on the market, regardless of these whales.

Yeah right, I think like that, everyone's perspective is different about this centralization. But I am very confident that centralization in general is not seen from the shareholders, but from how the network is run, regulation is also a factor of centralization.

[CarnagexD]

While most people tend to market bitcoin as being anti centralization, anti govt. so on and so forth, it occurred to me that it might just be centralized too. Seemingly we still have whales out there hoarding not just 1 5 or 10 bitcoins and its many many forks mind you (free Extra money) but with thousands upon thousands of bitcoins. So in all of this it's kind of a scary dilemma. What are you thoughts and comments on this seemingly true fact? Thoughts and comments are more than welcome.

The whales can definitely manipulate the climate of bitcoin but not to an extreme extent that fiat is being manipulated by the top 1% of the richest. The whales can pump or dump but can only change bitcoin's flow by hundreds and rarely thousands of dollars. This is because of how bitcoin is secured and volatile, along with other factors that affect bitcoin more than these whales do.

[outatime1]

There are a bunch of whales potentially with big wallets but that should change as they sell to lock in gains.  It will eventually allow the 21 million coins to be distributed among more people over time.

[Cimmy_revenger]

While most people tend to market bitcoin as being anti centralization, anti govt. so on and so forth, it occurred to me that it might just be centralized too. Seemingly we still have whales out there hoarding not just 1 5 or 10 bitcoins and its many many forks mind you (free Extra money) but with thousands upon thousands of bitcoins. So in all of this it's kind of a scary dilemma. What are you thoughts and comments on this seemingly true fact? Thoughts and comments are more than welcome.

decentralization does not mean not being subject to government regulations.
the creation of decentralization of many conventional banks that manipulate currencies with a variety of reasons.

[Tary12]

for the government, bitcoin is very detrimental and can be called anti-government. but there are also many people who really like bitcoin. hopefully bitcoin can be a decent place in the government and can be used as a whole.

[puertorikosena]

Perhaps centralization will solve the problem of mass adoption of cryptocurrencies, but then the whole point of using cryptocurrency as a whole is lost. Therefore, the struggle between state regulators and decentralized systems will be long and victory will not be on the side of the state.

[Linkkoin]

Perhaps centralization will solve the problem of mass adoption of cryptocurrencies, but then the whole point of using cryptocurrency as a whole is lost. Therefore, the struggle between state regulators and decentralized systems will be long and victory will not be on the side of the state.

Anyway, spreading the scope of legislation related to cryptocurrencies leads to some sort of centralization gradually. Do not be surprised if in the next couple of years authorities would require the same type of identity verification for wallets as now for opening bank accounts.

[Wysi]

Perhaps centralization will solve the problem of mass adoption of cryptocurrencies, but then the whole point of using cryptocurrency as a whole is lost. Therefore, the struggle between state regulators and decentralized systems will be long and victory will not be on the side of the state.

Anyway, spreading the scope of legislation related to cryptocurrencies leads to some sort of centralization gradually. Do not be surprised if in the next couple of years authorities would require the same type of identity verification for wallets as now for opening bank accounts.

That's true it's already in progress there are numerous bounty and ICO who don't give out their details but request users for KYC even for bounty participants. I think this is a gradual step towards the centralization which is against the whole concept of cryptocurrency and if this continues then crypto will become just like centralized wallets and digital payment method.

[Linkkoin]

That's true it's already in progress there are numerous bounty and ICO who don't give out their details but request users for KYC even for bounty participants. I think this is a gradual step towards the centralization which is against the whole concept of cryptocurrency and if this continues then crypto will become just like centralized wallets and digital payment method.

Of course without privacy, just like with wire bank transfers. They would explain, that without this fighting against pump and dump (what is banned on stocks) is virtually impossible and that cryptocurrencies cannot be widely adopted thanks to their volatility caused by P&D.

And once it is done, we might even face a situation that trading cryptocurrencies above some threshold/trading volume (or trading specific cryptos) would require you to obtain a state-issued broker license. Only having such license uploaded to exchange in a form of KYC would unlock trading limits.