Justin Bons Said Ethereum is More Decentralized Than Bitcoin

[hd49728]

Consider a cryptocurrency that was rolled back by a decision of a founder and group of core developers, is decentralized and more decentralized than Bitcoin is just nothing more than stupid.

I don't know Justin Bons but his thinking is seriously wrong.

What Was The DAO?.
The DAO Hack Remedy Forks Ethereum.

[Oshosondy]

Ethereum is the shitcoin that abandoned it's one USP "Code is law" the moment is was convenient for the rich creator and his friends. The guy in charge created a hard fork to protect their money instead of being a reliable block chain. The fact that it's centrally controlled is really all you need to know.

Ethereum has been centralized from its PoS and right from the beginning of the project. The developers like Vitalik Buterin are centrally controlling the coin. Just like you said, the original coin is ethereum classic. The developers called the former ether as ethereum classic and hard forked the new coin as ether which he moved to. That is a shady project that paved way for coins like the recent luna which the original token which was called luna is now called lunc. The influence those Buterin have on ethereum is too much and that is enough to even call it centralized.

[ABCbits]

Bitcoin, the pioneer of blockchain technology, showcases a strong foundation in certain aspects of decentralization:

Validator Count: It has the second-highest validator count, earning an 8/10.

If he refer to total Bitcoin nodes,

Client Ecosystem: Dominated by Bitcoin Core, leading to a 1/10 score.

It's true most nodes use Bitcoin Core. But it totally ignore existence of other Bitcoin full node software.

Permissionless Nature: Scores a perfect 10/10, with no permissioned elements.

It's not perfect when miner have full right to decide which transaction to be included on their mined block.

Governance: Lacks on-chain governance, resulting in a 0/10.

Giving 0/10 is ridiculous, on-chain government doesn't always offer better decentralization mainly due to who can vote and weight of their vote.

Consensus Mechanism: Proof of Work (PoW) without native delegation, scoring 5/10.

Without detailed reasoning, i feel 5/10 is rather low score.

Community Diversity: A growing “wizard faction” contributes to a 5/10 score.

I don't know what he mean by "wizard faction". But i agree Bitcoin community could be more diverse.

I've always suspected that big players like Bitmain could build a lot of hashrate to increasingly centralize Bitcoin. For the experts in the house, how true is it that Ethereum is more decentralized than Bitcoin?

I'm not expert, but personally i say not true when the measurement has some flaws and lack of explanation.

[Synchronice]

Sure, Ethereum is more decentralized, Vitalik owns 285 Million ETH (Satoshi is dead or doesn't exist anymore, so the fact that Bitcoin's founder owns million Bitcoin doesn't  doesn't apply to Bitcoin). Ethereum devs proposed validator limit increase From 32 To 2048 ETH, sure, a way for more decentralization, right? Also, it follows Bitcoin's price, it's such a decentralized.

[hd49728]

Sure, Ethereum is more decentralized, Vitalik owns 285 Million ETH (Satoshi is dead or doesn't exist anymore, so the fact that Bitcoin's founder owns million Bitcoin doesn't  doesn't apply to Bitcoin). Ethereum devs proposed validator limit increase From 32 To 2048 ETH, sure, a way for more decentralization, right?

It is two things to show Ethereum is not more decentralized than Bitcoin.

It was premined. The founder has great percent of ETH in total supply.
Its has very little validators and can not compare to Bitcoin nodes.

Lastly its blockchain was rolled back.

Also, it follows Bitcoin's price, it's such a decentralized.

It is not related to decentralized or centralized even it's fact that Ethereum does not lead cryptocurrency market but Bitcoin leads it.

[m2017]

Ethereum is the shitcoin that abandoned it's one USP "Code is law" the moment is was convenient for the rich creator and his friends. The guy in charge created a hard fork to protect their money instead of being a reliable block chain. The fact that it's centrally controlled is really all you need to know.

But this is a good shitcoin, right? Even without decentralization.

Of course, one can't say about any decentralization in the case of ethereum, and certainly that this decentralization is better than that of bitcoin. Statements to the contrary by public figures in the cryptoindustry will not be seen as anything other than a shilling. All this talk about ethereum's decentralization looks like complete stupidity to people who are more or less in the know. But this shitcoin is really good though.

[BlackHatCoiner]

Ethereum is a joke. Forget about the censorship and Proof-of-Stake. Over 70% of ETH was premined. That's all the information I need to argue it's less decentralized centralized.

Bitcoin has 18,215 nodes, while Ethereum has only 6,347 nodes. So BTC has more validators than ETH, the real validator is the one who run full node, not someone who stake their tokens to earn interest.

"Full nodes" play an unimportant role in decentralization, and it'd be my last resort as an argument. Mining is what keeps things decentralized.

It's not perfect when miner have full right to decide which transaction to be included on their mined block.

Why not? They have right over which transactions they include on their block, not on other miners' blocks.

[hatshepsut93]

What's the point in listening to what altcoin people say? Of course they are going to promote the coins that they are heavily invested in and attack Bitcoin, because they say that their altcoins will replace it.

If people were doing their research, they would know that altcoins all have centralized development, huge premines and typically high degree of centralization on the protocol level. And on top of that they have no real world uses - so they always collapse when the market moves on to new hyped investments.

[headingnorth]

Ethereum is the biggest scam on the internet and should have been shut down long ago for securities fraud.
It amazes me after all these years people still haven't figured it out yet and this CBDC garbage token still retains its second place status after bitcoin.

So many idiots "invest" their money without understanding what they are investing in. That is not investing it is straight up gambling.

[Wind_FURY]

Ethereum is more decentralized in what way? It's obvious that it's easier to sync a Bitcoin full node today than an Ethereum full node because Bitcoin has lower hardware requirements.

Plus don't mention "light nodes". Haha. Those are not actual nodes that download the blockchain, and actually validate the state of the chain. Those are mere pseudo-nodes.

[alastantiger]

I don't know Justin Bons but his thinking is seriously wrong.

Justin is seriously wrong about this. It well known and has been spoken of many times that Ethereum is centralized. This occurred due to the move from proof of work to proof of stake, where a few entities now control a majority of staked Ethereum and we know how this potentially enabling censorship under government pressure.

[livingfree]

Instead of keeping ETH as a POW that keeps its network secured, they've made it into a POS to make every who's already rich through it become richer.

If it's about the discussion about centralization and decentralization, the most decentralized cryptocurrency is none other than Bitcoin.

Keep that in mind and whoever tells shit about Bitcoin for being lesser decentralized and comparing it to a coin that has premined and changed its consensus favoring the rich is talking nonsense.

[Pandji02]

Instead of keeping ETH as a POW that keeps its network secured, they've made it into a POS to make every who's already rich through it become richer.

If it's about the discussion about centralization and decentralization, the most decentralized cryptocurrency is none other than Bitcoin.

Keep that in mind and whoever tells shit about Bitcoin for being lesser decentralized and comparing it to a coin that has premined and changed its consensus favoring the rich is talking nonsense.

True, I don't really understand how anyone can call something more decentralized than BTC. It's is an example of decentralization.

[ABCbits]

It's not perfect when miner have full right to decide which transaction to be included on their mined block.

Why not? They have right over which transactions they include on their block, not on other miners' blocks.

Because possibility of intentionally exclude transaction due to other reason than tx fee rate. For example, Antpool used to exclude SegWit TX while some politician have idea to force pool exclude certain transaction.

[BlackHatCoiner]

Because possibility of intentionally exclude transaction due to other reason than tx fee rate. For example, Antpool used to exclude SegWit TX while some politician have idea to force pool exclude certain transaction.

Antpool can right as well choose to censor legacy transactions, but that does not prevent the Bitcoin user from sending and receiving to segwit or legacy. Correct me if I'm wrong, but every attempt to censor a particular group of transactions by a pool has proved to be a failure, and wasted money. And that's because whatever is dumped by one pool is selected by another. Therefore, I think it is wrong to refer to the network as permission-requiring, since censorship resistance isn't merely a principle, but a side effect of the game theory.

As long as honest miners overthrow malicious, hereby do not intentionally reorg the chain to reverse transactions, the system is censorship resistant.

[ABCbits]

Because possibility of intentionally exclude transaction due to other reason than tx fee rate. For example, Antpool used to exclude SegWit TX while some politician have idea to force pool exclude certain transaction.

Antpool can right as well choose to censor legacy transactions, but that does not prevent the Bitcoin user from sending and receiving to segwit or legacy.

Doesn't prevent, but delay certain transaction from getting confirmation.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but every attempt to censor a particular group of transactions by a pool has proved to be a failure, and wasted money. And that's because whatever is dumped by one pool is selected by another. Therefore, I think it is wrong to refer to the network as permission-requiring, since censorship resistance isn't merely a principle, but a side effect of the game theory.

As long as honest miners overthrow malicious, hereby do not intentionally reorg the chain to reverse transactions, the system is censorship resistant.

You're right, although whether it's wasting money or not depends on how many address or TX they want to block. Here's an analysis which detect some pools may exclude or block certain address, https://b10c.me/observations/08-missing-sanctioned-transactions/.

[kryptqnick]

Op, it would be nice to add a source to the post, so that people can read it themselves and see where the info is coming from. As you can see, not doing that results in confusion, some assuming that you even referred to a completely different person (Justin Sun), before Despairo found a Twitter account of Justin Bons.
In any case, that's just one man's opinion. As you can see here, there are other views, claiming that Ethereum is actually less decentralized than Bitcoin.
PoS naturally leads to more centralization than PoW, which is where Bitcoin is winning as a PoW cryptocurrency.

[pakhitheboss]

What I think here is that this guy dares to compare Ethereum (shitcoin) with Bitcoin. In simple words those who founded Ethereum as still active and hold a lot of pre-mined ETH while the visionary of Bitcoin known as Satoshi Nakamoto is even a human or a group of humans still unknown. What is alarming about Ethereum is now using POS which is a centralized model and Bitcoin won't have any protocol changes like Ethereum did which makes it more decentralized. The only reason everyone wants a piece of ETH is because of its ecosystem as without it you are into a ditch.

[swogerino]

I don’t understand the whole decentralization comparison when it is crystal clear the bitcoin nodes and how it works explain a true decentralized network, just any one can be part of the node but that doesn’t relay to Ethereum chain where validators are mostly the center of attention for the network decision making which defeats the whole point of decentralization.

That is crystal clear that the validators in Ethereum network can be a bunch of gangs who happen to be near the founder of Ethereum and they have the right to validate,most people,most normal people do not have over 32 Ethereum to validate transactions so they are somewhat chosen ones and they can have an outcome and impact on the road map of the Ethereum in general,the Dapps were great at sometime ago yet I have not seen such activity lately or maybe I have missed them so in reality they are not decentralized at all let alone to be better decentralized than Bitcoin,that is pure nonsense.

[marlo1001]

I don't think that pos coin could be more decentralized than pow