Bitcoin is not decentralized

[CryptoHFs]

Yes, bitcoin is not decentralized.

1- as you may have seen binance was about to ruin the whole crypto market in 2019 when they wanted to reorg blocks to recover a hacked 7,000 bitcoins.

2- a lot of people's worried about foundry market share in the mining space as it threats bitcoin security and partial decentralization

And there is many other points

In short decentralization for bitcoin is like anonymity for mixers you just add another layer of security for investments but this doesn't mean that mixers don't record your data like chipmixer did, and also it doesn't mean that bitcoin is 100% decentralized as you saw it just needs huge power to have it ruined and that is a good reason to use it

Thanks

[1715324309]

1715324309

[cryptoaddictchie]

In short decentralization for bitcoin is like anonymity for mixers you just add another layer of security for investments but this doesn't mean that mixers don't record your data like chipmixer did, and also it doesn't mean that bitcoin is 100% decentralized as you saw it just needs huge power to have it ruined and that is a good reason to use it

Are you that hater? No ones gonna believed you just because you pointed out some issues. If hacked coins were compromised, the issuer of bitcoin cant do anything about it due to decentralization. Means they cant change or alter the effects of it. Just because some third party getting headlines or got some problem with their bitcoin holding doesnt mean its bitcoin fault. No one can conyrol the outcome of each holdings of everyone only but yourself.

[CryptoHFs]

In short decentralization for bitcoin is like anonymity for mixers you just add another layer of security for investments but this doesn't mean that mixers don't record your data like chipmixer did, and also it doesn't mean that bitcoin is 100% decentralized as you saw it just needs huge power to have it ruined and that is a good reason to use it

Are you that hater? No ones gonna believed you just because you pointed out some issues. If hacked coins were compromised, the issuer of bitcoin cant do anything about it due to decentralization. Means they cant change or alter the effects of it. Just because some third party getting headlines or got some problem with their bitcoin holding doesnt mean its bitcoin fault. No one can conyrol the outcome of each holdings of everyone only but yourself.

Hater
Lover
Belief
Disbelief
Doesn't apply to what I say only facts
What you said I did say it already it adds another layer making it harder but at the end its not that decentralized just stronger system

[BlackHatCoiner]

1- as you may have seen binance was about to ruin the whole crypto market in 2019 when they wanted to reorg blocks to recover a hacked 7,000 bitcoins.

And I want a billion dollars, but I can't have them without doing the work.

In short decentralization for bitcoin is like anonymity for mixers you just add another layer of security for investments but this doesn't mean that mixers don't record your data like chipmixer did

Lol, this misinformation has to sometime stop. We know nothing apart from ChipMixer holding 7 TB of data. The feds have revealed absolutely no information related to clients' data, except from the part that it included private keys. The rest of the data could be anything, and as the storage is concerned, seven terabytes are mountainously more than needed to keep logs.

[Solosanz]

What's the relation between decentralization and mixer?

If you use decentralized exchange, use non custodial wallet especially you're run full node, and avoid to link your Bitcoin or address in everywhere, how someone can know you're holding Bitcoin? no one know and you don't have to use mixer.

There's no threat for mining company who's control big hashrate, they can't perform 51% attack.

[CryptoHFs]

1- as you may have seen binance was about to ruin the whole crypto market in 2019 when they wanted to reorg blocks to recover a hacked 7,000 bitcoins.

And I want a billion dollars, but I can't have them without doing the work.

In short decentralization for bitcoin is like anonymity for mixers you just add another layer of security for investments but this doesn't mean that mixers don't record your data like chipmixer did

Lol, this misinformation has to sometime stop. We know nothing apart from ChipMixer holding 7 TB of data. The feds have revealed absolutely no information related to clients' data, except from the part that it included private keys. The rest of the data could be anything, and as the storage is concerned, seven terabytes are mountainously more than needed to keep logs.

Even if they didn't this concern means they have the power to it if they wish so the issue remains whether chip did that or not

[Obari]

In short decentralization for bitcoin is like anonymity for mixers you just add another layer of security for investments but this doesn't mean that mixers don't record your data like chipmixer did, and also it doesn't mean that bitcoin is 100% decentralized as you saw it just needs huge power to have it ruined and that is a good reason to use it

Are you that hater? No ones gonna believed you just because you pointed out some issues. If hacked coins were compromised, the issuer of bitcoin cant do anything about it due to decentralization. Means they cant change or alter the effects of it. Just because some third party getting headlines or got some problem with their bitcoin holding doesnt mean its bitcoin fault. No one can conyrol the outcome of each holdings of everyone only but yourself.

I agree with you mate and if bitcoin  wasn't decentralized,  then I believe  it would have been compromised and due to binance popularity and dominance in the cryptocurrency, .any other people confuse binance  and cz as the owner of every other cryptocurrency and determinant of bitcoin and cryptocurrency prices.
Op, I believe  if there was a way to get bitcoin compromised,  then the top government officials  would have gladly invested in such project but unfortunately I don't think they can and even if they can, then it will definitely  not be now.

Binance  is a third-party  and the fact that they wanted to investigate an attack should  solely be because the transaction was still within their reach and the truth  is that except from using third parties, no one is in charge of your hodlings except the holder and it seems your attack is more on mixers and you should talk to them and not attack bitcoin  in general.

[She shining]

I came across a post on reddit that talked about a website by doge coin developer called arewedecentralizedyet.com which for reasons I know nothing about have been removed but some comments like

LIAD APR 16, 2018
“are we decentralised yet, and what’s the plan to get there”.Whilst NEO as an example with only a handful of nodes all centrally controlled appears on the surface to be a private company, there is a detailed decentralisation plan, roadmap and timeline .Most worrying on that site for me is actually bitcoin. Pushing 10yrs old and mining power still massively centralised

I was expecting something of this nature when I saw the post title, but here am seeing  mixer and decentralization. There exist centralized and decentralized mixers and a company able to collect customers data doesn't mean Bitcoin isn't decentralized.
Are you going to also point out that since there exist centralized exchange then Bitcoin is centralized?
Mixers doesn't equal decentralization nor is it compulsory to secure ones Bitcoin.

[BlackHatCoiner]

If you use decentralized exchange, use non custodial wallet especially you're run full node, and avoid to link your Bitcoin or address in everywhere, how someone can know you're holding Bitcoin?

They'll know when you'll use toxic change as input in a transaction. The people whom you exchanged with can de-anonymize the inputs.

Even if they didn't this concern means they have the power to it if they wish so the issue remains whether chip did that or not

This is an entirely different statement to make. Obviously, the concern ChipMixer holds logs exists since day 1. There's nothing revealed to us, after it got shut down. They have no power if they wish to, as you say, because there is no evidence they were keeping logs. If they did keep logs, then yeah, there would be concern the feds have accessed them, but there's no such thing known.

[CryptoHFs]

I came across a post on reddit that talked about a website by doge coin developer called arewedecentralizedyet.com which for reasons I know nothing about have been removed but some comments like

LIAD APR 16, 2018
“are we decentralised yet, and what’s the plan to get there”.Whilst NEO as an example with only a handful of nodes all centrally controlled appears on the surface to be a private company, there is a detailed decentralisation plan, roadmap and timeline .Most worrying on that site for me is actually bitcoin. Pushing 10yrs old and mining power still massively centralised

I was expecting something of this nature when I saw the post title, but here am seeing  mixer and decentralization. There exist centralized and decentralized mixers and a company able to collect customers data doesn't mean Bitcoin isn't decentralized.
Are you going to also point out that since there exist centralized exchange then Bitcoin is centralized?
Mixers doesn't equal decentralization nor is it compulsory to secure ones Bitcoin.

Mixers were used as an example that as long as major parts is under hu.an control then its not decentralized

[DooMAD]

binance was about to ruin the whole crypto market in 2019 when they wanted to reorg blocks to recover a hacked 7,000 bitcoins.

"Wanted to" and "accomplished" are two very different things.  If they had been successful in doing that, then yes, that would demonstrate Bitcoin wasn't decentralised.  But it didn't happen.  The network of fully independent users easily prevented it.  There was never any risk of it actually going ahead.  No single entity is in a position to force through a change like that.

but this doesn't mean that mixers don't record your data like chipmixer did

Still yet to see any detail of what the seized data actually was.  Could have been multiple copies of the blockchain for all we know.  

[aylabadia05]

Yes, bitcoin is not decentralized.

This is something that keeps us from saying "wow" on a topic like this because different people have different ways of interpreting what they see and what they feel.
If you feel Bitcoin is not decentralized by your own interpretation, don't force people to convince your interpretation to be correct.

By definition, Bitcoin decentralization has been explained clearly and the mixer function is also very clear, making it easier for you to find out what it is all about.

[CryptoHFs]

Yes, bitcoin is not decentralized.

This is something that keeps us from saying "wow" on a topic like this because different people have different ways of interpreting what they see and what they feel.
If you feel Bitcoin is not decentralized by your own interpretation, don't force people to convince your interpretation to be correct.

By definition, Bitcoin decentralization has been explained clearly and the mixer function is also very clear, making it easier for you to find out what it is all about.

Why don't you help me in the bluewallet thread 

[CryptoHFs]

Yes, bitcoin is not decentralized.

1- as you may have seen binance was about to ruin the whole crypto market in 2019 when they wanted to reorg blocks to recover a hacked 7,000 bitcoins.

2- a lot of people's worried about foundry market share in the mining space as it threats bitcoin security and partial decentralization

And there is many other points

In short decentralization for bitcoin is like anonymity for mixers you just add another layer of security for investments but this doesn't mean that mixers don't record your data like chipmixer did, and also it doesn't mean that bitcoin is 100% decentralized as you saw it just needs huge power to have it ruined and that is a good reason to use it

Thanks

The potential centralization of Bitcoin is a valid concern, as demonstrated by Binance's influence on the network in 2019 and the growing market share of Foundry in mining. However, it is important to recognize that Bitcoin is still more decentralized than any other form of currency.

Unlike traditional currencies, Bitcoin is not controlled by central servers or authorities. The network is maintained by a distributed network of miners, and anyone can become a miner with the right hardware and software. This means that no single entity or group has control over Bitcoin, which is a significant advantage.

Furthermore, the Bitcoin network is constantly evolving and improving, becoming more decentralized and secure with the development of new technologies. For instance, the Lightning Network enables instant and low-cost transactions, making Bitcoin more accessible for everyday use and reducing the reliance on miners for transaction processing.

Exactly what I said. Are you using AI?

[DaveF]

Bitcoin is decentralized, BUT as with anything you can always find something that looks bad.

Nobody is really worried about Foundry. Why? Foundry is not stupid, they know that once their hashrate goes above a certain point the optics will be bad and that could negatively affect the price of BTC and they don't want that. Look at what happened to F2 when they got to 50%

As for the 7TB of chipmixer. We don't know what was there and why. It was multiple servers and if they were running core that is 500GB+ per box.
And, as everyone knows but keeps forgetting. There is deleted files and securely erased files. If he created a file and then removed it when the transaction was complete as we well know that file IS recoverable until it is securely wiped from the drive. SSDs are even worse since they try to do wear leveling so cells may not be written over until the entire drive has been passed over.

Some exchanges not wanting to take some coins? Yes, that sucks but they are private businesses and can do as they wish. There are enough places that do not care and the P2P and DEX options are also out there.

-Dave

[thepeterson]

Bitcoin is decentralized, BUT as with anything you can always find something that looks bad.

Nobody is really worried about Foundry. Why? Foundry is not stupid, they know that once their hashrate goes above a certain point the optics will be bad and that could negatively affect the price of BTC and they don't want that. Look at what happened to F2 when they got to 50%

As for the 7TB of chipmixer. We don't know what was there and why. It was multiple servers and if they were running core that is 500GB+ per box.
And, as everyone knows but keeps forgetting. There is deleted files and securely erased files. If he created a file and then removed it when the transaction was complete as we well know that file IS recoverable until it is securely wiped from the drive. SSDs are even worse since they try to do wear leveling so cells may not be written over until the entire drive has been passed over.

Some exchanges not wanting to take some coins? Yes, that sucks but they are private businesses and can do as they wish. There are enough places that do not care and the P2P and DEX options are also out there.

-Dave

Brilliant as always and exactly what I want to say. People should know that stuff are possible whether it's gonna happen or not. Thanks for passing by!

[20kevin20]

I think you got it wrong. Binance wanted to reorg but it never happened. A 51% attack can happen but it never happened. Bitcoin has enough enemies who’d drool over ruining BTC by attacking it, but realistically this can’t happen.

Bitcoin’s more decentralized than ever. If somehow something happens with the miners and they decide to conquer and change BTC, Bitcoin is a community and if the community doesn’t agree it just won’t happen - or it’ll happen on a separate chain while we continue using the old BTC as it used to be.

Prove BTC is centralized.

[m2017]

Yes, bitcoin is not decentralized.

I would like to hear from you the facts confirming what has been said.

1- as you may have seen binance was about to ruin the whole crypto market in 2019 when they wanted to reorg blocks to recover a hacked 7,000 bitcoins.

I didn't understand, so binance did what it intended or not?

As far as I know, they failed to ruin the market, as a result. Then how can they be blamed for something they didn't do?

2- a lot of people's worried about foundry market share in the mining space as it threats bitcoin security and partial decentralization

I guess people's experiences about bitcoin security and partial decentralization and Bitcoin is not decentralized are completely different things. I think you are confusing soft with warm.

And there is many other points

More details here, please. We will listen to you carefully.

In short decentralization for bitcoin is like anonymity for mixers you just add another layer of security for investments but this doesn't mean that mixers don't record your data like chipmixer did, and also it doesn't mean that bitcoin is 100% decentralized as you saw it just needs huge power to have it ruined and that is a good reason to use it

Thanks

A curious allegory, but I did not catch the logical connection between bitcoin and mixers in the context of the topic under discussion.

[BlackHatCoiner]

If somehow something happens with the miners and they decide to conquer and change BTC, Bitcoin is a community and if the community doesn’t agree it just won’t happen

That's partially correct. Sure, if some miners decide to increase the block size limit, the community (which is the rest of the users) can deny that, and make their chain worthless, and therefore any hash spent on it. But, if the miners (pools to be precise) decide to execute a 51% attack, and change the past transactions, there is really nothing the community can do. The whole point of Bitcoin relies on the disincentive of this execution.

[elevates]

I do not agree with the way you have presented decentralization in Bitcoin. You cannot say that Bitcoin is not decentralized, you could have said absolute decentralization cannot be achieved in Bitcoin. I agree with all your facts and that being said it means that Bitcoin requires substantial power to be compromised. That should be taken as a strength rather than a weakness, its network resilience, and security makes it more trustable than any other so called decentralized network.