Bitcoin would had crashed by now if it was a centralized technology

[EluguHcman]

If Bitcoin was a centralized technology, it would had crashed by now because the controversial would had been in the selfishness of the authorities regulating it to specially profit them alone and only investors who may be lucky to be on the same track lines with them probably knowingly and unknowingly would be the ones to benefit along with them.

We all knows how dubious and sentimental the governments always are with the masses either by implementing the laws and the economy structures which the poor and the average masses suffers the implementation structures.

That is just how the  technology system would had been and then by now, the Bitcoin would have been a historical technology to had been dumped by now.
So, let us all together enjoy the decentralization of this unique global financial Bitcoin technology.

[adultcrypto]

I tend to agree with you on this; Bitcoin was not initially accepted by many governments as it was seen as a thread to their power and control. Assuming Bitcoin was centralized,  it would have taken just one concocted law or regulation to seize and ban it outrightly. But due to the decentralized nature of Bitcoin, it becomes difficult for the authorities to do that.

What we are seeing now in terms of some governments holding Bitcoin and even the case of ETF approval were all possible because time have proven that Bitcoin is not as bad as the authorities and some critics made us to think. So at this point we are seeing the manifestation of the saying "if you can't beat them, join them"

[Lucius]

If Bitcoin was a centralized technology, it would had crashed by now because the controversial would had been in the selfishness of the authorities regulating it to specially profit them alone and only investors who may be lucky to be on the same track lines with them probably knowingly and unknowingly would be the ones to benefit along with them.
~snip~

I would not agree that Bitcoin as a centralized project would have failed by now, because you forget that the vast majority of people still blindly trust their governments, and this means that trust in Bitcoin would probably be much higher than it is the case with a decentralized one.

What is certain is that many more people would have known about Bitcoin from the beginning because the government or governments would have done a lot of promotion - but what is certain is that Bitcoin would certainly not be as profitable as it is today, because if governments wanted their citizens to be rich, then the majority of the world would not live in relative poverty.

I tend to agree with you on this; Bitcoin was not initially accepted by many governments as it was seen as a thread to their power and control.

It's still like that, especially if you look at the trend that is slowly spreading around the world - Bitcoin is banned as a means of payment in Turkey, Thailand, Vietnam (I think even Nigeria), but it is allowed for possession and trading. This only shows what governments are actually afraid of, and I fear that there will be much more of this in the future.

What we are seeing now in terms of some governments holding Bitcoin and even the case of ETF approval were all possible because time have proven that Bitcoin is not as bad as the authorities and some critics made us to think. So at this point we are seeing the manifestation of the saying "if you can't beat them, join them"

It is possible to interpret things in that way, but I would still say "if you can't beat them, try to control them". What is happening in the US is a classic example of trying to take control of something that is out of control, and in the case of BTC that means taking over key infrastructure such as CEXs, BTC mining and directing trading to big players through ETFs. If we look at the big picture, I would conclude that their plan is going very well for now.

[goldkingcoiner]

If Bitcoin was centralized, somebody would have rugged pulled by now.

[Yucky]

But there are centralized technology that has remained relevant for an approximate number of years just like Bitcoin has also stayed but hasn't crashed yet. I feel that although Bitcoin being decentralized has helped it in certain instances most expecially during its downtime, thier are other factors that has helped it in combination with it decentralized nature to have stood the test of time.

Bitcoin isn't even the only decentralized technology we have currently. Altcoins, and lots of meme coin that also came up and built her system just like how Bitcoin is hasn't gained the level of consistency and uniqueness we've seen with Bitcoin and that goes to show that it's not just about Bitcoin being decentralized that has helped it this far. The Bitcoin blockchain and the believe that people have for Bitcoin is majorly what's responsible for what has helped Bitcoin to keep growing even though it occasionally witnessed most ups and downtime.

[EluguHcman]

If Bitcoin was centralized, somebody would have rugged pulled by now.

Exactly and then the centralized authorities would decide the faith at which the market can only be profitable prioritizing it on their selfish interests.

It feels a scenario like... Let activate the valuability of Bitcoin for a market increase for we (cabals) to cash out and then once they cashes out, they would deactivate the that profiting era of the market event without considering the interest of the venerable investors.
Indeed decentralization in this technology system is worth an equality and system.

[Spaceman1000$]

If Bitcoin was a centralized technology, it would had crashed by now because the controversial would had been in the selfishness of the authorities regulating it to specially profit them alone and only investors who may be lucky to be on the same track lines with them probably knowingly and unknowingly would be the ones to benefit along with them.

We all knows how dubious and sentimental the governments always are with the masses either by implementing the laws and the economy structures which the poor and the average masses suffers the implementation structures.

That is just how the  technology system would had been and then by now, the Bitcoin would have been a historical technology to had been dumped by now.
So, let us all together enjoy the decentralization of this unique global financial Bitcoin technology.

The Blockchain technology and cryptocurrency has enjoyed it's own advancement obviously because of the decentralized nature it was built.
The developers of Blockchain and cryptocurrency technology understand that, that data protection and the sustainability of information in a centralized system cannot be manipulated and gagged by Government authorities in the world. So to a large extent OP I agree with you, even as decentralized as Bitcoin is right now, there are a lot of countries in the world throwing sanctions and counter sanctions on Bitcoin just to show their disdain on the cryptocurrency market, but yet Bitcoin has been waxing stronger as the day persist.

[Stablexcoin]

If Bitcoin was a centralized technology, it would had crashed by now because the controversial would had been in the selfishness of the authorities regulating it to specially profit them alone and only investors who may be lucky to be on the same track lines with them probably knowingly and unknowingly would be the ones to benefit along with them.
~snip~

I would not agree that Bitcoin as a centralized project would have failed by now, because you forget that the vast majority of people still blindly trust their governments, and this means that trust in Bitcoin would probably be much higher than it is the case with a decentralized one.

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you here. Your government may be free and fair but you shouldn't generalise it for all countries. It depends on the government regulating Bitcoin for the people to trust them. Where I come from we do not trust our government and if by any chance they get to regulate Bitcoin with full authority, there will be nothing left for us the citizens. Anything with central authority and governance is bound to have issues any day if not soon enough. Don't forget power changes and when it gets shifted into the wrong ones then it is a problem.

[el kaka22]

This is true, I am sure that we are going to end up with something that will grow a lot more. Decentralized style of bitcoin is something that we are going to profit a lot from, and that is why I think we should be considering this as a good thing and we need to focus a lot more on this. I am not saying that we are going to be a million dollars per coin anytime soon, I know the limits of the situation, but at the same time I have to point out that I agree that a centralized one would have crashed long long time ago.

First of all, the fact that it can't be "shut down" is the most important thing, governments can try to ban it, but can never stop it. This alone makes it so valuable and anyone who understands that buys some coins.

[yhiaali3]

It is possible to interpret things in that way, but I would still say "if you can't beat them, try to control them". What is happening in the US is a classic example of trying to take control of something that is out of control, and in the case of BTC that means taking over key infrastructure such as CEXs, BTC mining and directing trading to big players through ETFs. If we look at the big picture, I would conclude that their plan is going very well for now.

Yes, I completely agree with you. I have mentioned this in more than one previous post, but I call it “containment.” If you cannot ban or eliminate something, you can contain it in one way or another and make it subject to your control.

Governments, especially the United States government, could not overcome Bitcoin, so they resorted to a policy of containment, meaning they seek to control Bitcoin indirectly, as you mentioned, through infrastructure, mining, and central ETF companies.

Even Trump's recent statements that he will Americanize the mining of all remaining Bitcoin are also in this same vein.

[Lucius]

I would not agree that Bitcoin as a centralized project would have failed by now, because you forget that the vast majority of people still blindly trust their governments, and this means that trust in Bitcoin would probably be much higher than it is the case with a decentralized one.

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you here. Your government may be free and fair but you shouldn't generalise it for all countries. It depends on the government regulating Bitcoin for the people to trust them. Where I come from we do not trust our government and if by any chance they get to regulate Bitcoin with full authority, there will be nothing left for us the citizens. Anything with central authority and governance is bound to have issues any day if not soon enough. Don't forget power changes and when it gets shifted into the wrong ones then it is a problem.

I am speaking in general, not taking any particular country as an example. The fact is that less than 5% of people have any confidence in BTC today, while the other 95% obviously believe in something else - whether it's that they have no choice, or they just think that the system is good enough that it doesn't need to be changed.

Here we are talking about what would happen if BTC was from the beginning a centralized project of the most powerful countries in the world, but maybe it is completely meaningless considering that no government would make such a move.

[mirakal]

The misconception we have is that we think that if the government controls the crypto market, it is the worst thing that happen.
what if it is not?

We still speculate and we are not certain what really happens if bitcoin is centralized. I won't say it is positive but so many factors that may affect the market condition whether it is centralized or decentralized, many things will change when there is sabotage and market manipulation. In fact, even though we are in a decentralized market, still these things exist. Maybe yes, the situation is worse when it is in the centralized form but for now, it is not clear enough that we should be thankful that it is decentralized technology, can't have assurance in the coming days. I think this is not about a kind of technology but the adaption of the people.

[Iranus]

Bitcoin would had crashed by now if it was a centralized technology

What makes bitcoin attract people and people to pay attention to it is its decentralized nature. So I wonder if bitcoin was designed by Satoshi with centralized technology from the beginning, would anyone care about it? I even believe that it will fail soon after its introduction, let alone that it could last for a while and then start to collapse.

Everything in this world is centralized and we have so many options, I think there will be no reason for me to choose bitcoin when we have fiat, gold if bitcoin is centralized.

Let's look at altcoins, does anyone need them in the long run? And can any altcoin survive over time like bitcoin or still exist without bitcoin?

[Greyhats]

Whether the value goes up or down, the utility ... no the capability of bitcoin will continue to exist

1 BTC = 1 BTC

[X-ray]

Indeed the decentralized nature of bitcoin is also what makes it accessible by anyone around the globe without regional restriction.

so I do agree with your view that in some way, the decentralized technology of bitcoin is what really give it the strength to just outperform other assets honestly, I guess that's why some people call it revolutionary  .
but will still give the credit where its' due, there are authority/government that do the favour such as the el salvador government that really seems to be open to whole blockchain thing and cryptocurrency so it's not like government intervention is always bad, it depends. often time if the regulation is there to protect the crypto investor, it could also give good impression to crypto investment along the way strengthening the whole industry.

[justdimin]

Bitcoin would had crashed by now if it was a centralized technology

What makes bitcoin attract people and people to pay attention to it is its decentralized nature. So I wonder if bitcoin was designed by Satoshi with centralized technology from the beginning, would anyone care about it? I even believe that it will fail soon after its introduction, let alone that it could last for a while and then start to collapse.

Everything in this world is centralized and we have so many options, I think there will be no reason for me to choose bitcoin when we have fiat, gold if bitcoin is centralized.

Let's look at altcoins, does anyone need them in the long run? And can any altcoin survive over time like bitcoin or still exist without bitcoin?

That's the thing, bitcoin wasn't the first "e-money" system in the world, there were many of them since 90's and many of them tried and none of them achieved anything. This is just going viral or being hyped, after 15 years it would have gone away by now if it was just hype.

It's actually because of the decentralized nature of it, all the things that were created bitcoin were centralized, all the electronic money that resembled bitcoin were somehow required a central organization to keep it safe, but eventually people realized that we don't need it. Satoshi built one that is decentralized, and that's why it slowly grow bigger and bigger, we are at a stage where it is quite strong now, bigger than many nations GDP as well.

[Majestic-milf]

I would not agree that Bitcoin as a centralized project would have failed by now, because you forget that the vast majority of people still blindly trust their governments, and this means that trust in Bitcoin would probably be much higher than it is the case with a decentralized one.

True. What better way to get the masses to accept a project than to take up that project yourself, right? I'd like you to look at it this way too, probably the citizens may not accept Bitcoin but will be left with no choice than to do so if the government makes it mandatory. I believe there'd still be those who will prefer the traditional method of financial services to accepting Bitcoin any day but when there's a kind of 'law' binding them to it, it will then look like they're blindly trusting the government.

What is certain is that many more people would have known about Bitcoin from the beginning because the government or governments would have done a lot of promotion - but what is certain is that Bitcoin would certainly not be as profitable as it is today, because if governments wanted their citizens to be rich, then the majority of the world would not live in relative poverty.

I agree. There will be a widespread knowledge about Bitcoin but I still feel adoption rate will be low( especially if the citizens are given a choice like I mentioned). Take for instance in my country, when the government introduced the E-naira, (though it's a CBDC) but I'm using it as a project the government took up; it wasn't embraced with much enthusiasm despite the efforts they put in place to push it's popularity so I agree with the op too. In a way it will crash when it doesn't yield much profits.

[Despairo]

If centralization make cryptocurrency fail, then the number of cryptocurrency that listed on Coinmarketcap should be less than 10, but currently there are 2.4 Million coins.

So, I really doubt if Bitcoin would crash if it was centralized, many people would refrain to invest in Bitcoin, but we can't deny there are a lot people that don't care about the utility since they're only looking to flip their money.

Centralized Bitcoin might grow more than decentralized Bitcoin since the government can control it and make them rich.

[retreat]

Bitcoin wouldn't even last a few years if it used a centralized system. Because one of the strengths of Bitcoin and what makes it able to survive until now is how it runs using a decentralized system and that makes it unable to be intervened or confiscated by any party or government. This decentralized and intervention-free system makes many people believe in Bitcoin and it makes them remain optimistic about holding and continuing to invest in Bitcoin, even when in the past many countries banned Bitcoin trading and transactions.

[Cryptoprincess101]

I tend to agree with you on this; Bitcoin was not initially accepted by many governments as it was seen as a thread to their power and control. Assuming Bitcoin was centralized,  it would have taken just one concocted law or regulation to seize and ban it outrightly. But due to the decentralized nature of Bitcoin, it becomes difficult for the authorities to do that.

There was never a time the government accepted Bitcoin because the introduction of Bitcoin sounded like introducing an enemy to them because of the decentralized nature of Bitcoin and it's privacy as against government modules operandi of always wanting to know how funds are transacted in the banks. The reason why it looks like the government finally succumb to Bitcoin was because of freedom of choice because every one has the right of choosing what's best for them so far as they can take responsibility of any outcome that it brings alongside. Bitcoin doesn't need an intermediary as all transactions is done directly between the sender and the receiver without an intruder. Every transactions is seen in the blockchain which makes the system transparent for all to see.