Has Bitcoin lost it decentralization

[Queen uloma]

The number one reason why Bitcoin was created was for financial freedom, how people can save, store, and trade, it wasn't created to be controlled by anyone, Bitcoin is still decentralized but not that decentralized in physical,  reason being that only few mining pools and capable holders control a large part of it.
Note: that nobody can control Bitcoin not even the government or companies but they have little Price influence on it.

[_act_]

The number one reason why Bitcoin was created was for financial freedom, how people can save, store, and trade, it wasn't created to be controlled by anyone, Bitcoin is still decentralized but not that decentralized in physical,  reason being that only few mining pools and capable holders control a large part of it.

I think I will agree with the part of mining pools. But bitcoin is not as centralized as you think, the mining pools are still up to or more than 10 while there are solo miners that are still mining blocks.

Note: that nobody can control Bitcoin not even the government or companies but they have little influence on it.

The government has no control over bitcoin. No centralized authority has control over bitcoin.

[Frankolala]

A government can only manipulate the price of bitcoin temporarily, that doesn't mean that bitcoin isn't decentralized in nature. Bitcoin protocol remains decentralized and nothing has changed. If you look at it from the past, the government have tried every possible means to see if they can control bitcoin but they have failed because bitcoin is not centralized.

[Royal Cap]

But the point is that having influence and controlling are not the same thing. Large miners or holders cannot change the rules of Bitcoin as they wish because ultimately consensus is determined by the overall participants of the network. So I would say that Bitcoin is not completely free but it has enough decentralization so that no single party can manipulate it to their advantage and this is where the greatest value lies.

[headingnorth]

Bitcoin mining is too concentrated in the hands of a few big players.

But to me an even bigger problem are the developers who are largely concentrated in the US.
Bitcoin developers are vulnerable to being influenced by crypto lobby and VC money.
Most if not all are in fact financed by big players on Wall Street.

The latest major changes to the Bitcoin code for example was made directly at the request of
crypto startup Citrea to enable a greater amount of shitcoin spam on the bitcoin network.

Obviously that is very bad. When developers can be so easily manipulated by big money that is not a good sign.

[moneystery]

If we look at it now, Bitcoin mining is dominated by only a few big players and we cannot deny that it makes the Bitcoin network less democratic than intended, but they do not influence the network so much as to dominate it, because there are still many independent miners and smaller miners participating in the network, which helps maintain a degree of decentralization, and there are still mechanisms within the Bitcoin protocol, such as the consensus rules, which will prevent a single miner or group from unilaterally changing how the network operates.

[₿itcoin]

The number one reason why Bitcoin was created was for financial freedom, how people can save, store, and trade, it wasn't created to be controlled by anyone, Bitcoin is still decentralized but not that decentralized in physical,  reason being that only few mining pools and capable holders control a large part of it.
Note: that nobody can control Bitcoin not even the government or companies but they have little Price influence on it.

You are right, Bitcoin was originally created for financial freedom &  decentralization however I think its more complicated than that. On the one hand, Bitcoins protocol is open &  not controlled by any company or government,  which is why its still decentralized. On the other hand, mining power is really heavily concentrated in a few specific pools. That is, a few companies control almost all of the hashrate. Also, many users do not run their own nodes &  are dependent on large platforms or exchanges. This creates a risk of centralization at the user level.

So there is no doubt that Bitcoin still preserves its basic decentralization ideals very well.. However, some parts of its ecosystem are showing signs of centralization. The big challenge for maximalists is to maintain the principle of decentralization, ensure the security of their assets &  spread mining operations across different locations.

[Churchillvv]

In terms of general control or ownership they do not have anything on bitcoin but in terms of price manipulation yeah sure 100% they can move bitcoin to a good price and also influence it to bear or rock down hence I also feel same way sometimes since the involvement of some financial firms or companies or governments in bitcoin but believe some many not agree with you as they do not see what we see, here in the forum some people have decided to be blind towards some reality.

[Numeral]

Bitcoin does not lose its decentralization technically, everything remains the same. It's just that those in power and financial magnates are trying to accumulate large amounts of bitcoin for several reasons, one of which is the ability to influence the price.

Right now, major politicians such as Donald Trump periodically influence the markets, and this can often be called manipulation. I even suspect that representatives of the US administration earn money for the state and themselves in this way. And when the markets are influenced, all assets, both decentralized and centralized, are affected. Therefore, in this context, I would not single out Bitcoin as a more vulnerable or, conversely, less vulnerable asset.

[Jewan420]

Of course we sometimes see influence on the price due to centralized actions, but this does not make Bitcoin lose its independence or its decentralized nature. Bitcoin's decentralization depends on no single person controlling the use of Bitcoin, no one controlling the supply in the market, no one controlling the transactions, and no one controlling the price. But what you are talking about is influence, not control. So rest assured that Bitcoin is still completely decentralized. But people rarely use Bitcoin in a decentralized way, because we still prefer to be dependent on others (centralized exchanges, crypto banks, etc.).

[EL MOHA]

The latest major changes to the Bitcoin code for example was made directly at the request of
crypto startup Citrea to enable a greater amount of shitcoin spam on the bitcoin network.

Obviously that is very bad. When developers can be so easily manipulated by big money that is not a good sign.

We are back at this place again, I could remember during the ordinals and inscriptions period where there the network was congested and hike the transaction fee then, and many people were actually requesting for protocols like this shouldn’t be allowed on bitcoin some actually suggest that maybe a lesser portion of the block be available for them only. But what many are saying is if you decide to actually stop the development of this protocols on bitcoin network or place some limitations wouldn’t that be more like censorship that we ran away from in traditional currency.

Of course we sometimes see influence on the price due to centralized actions, but this does not make Bitcoin lose its independence or its decentralized nature.

Bitcoin price changes doesn’t have anything to do with bitcoin decentralization status the market price is on investors, decentralization is actually about the network which is solely still decentralized until we see censorship on the network that we can say it’s not decentralized

[Dunamisx]

Irrespective of the conditions, bitcoin cannot be centralized, even though there have been several attempts to make it do so, government over time has been giving series of attempts to centralized it, discourage it and even end it, but the network news so built in such a way that forbids any attempt that could change its protocols, which we enjoy till today.

[headingnorth]

The latest major changes to the Bitcoin code for example was made directly at the request of
crypto startup Citrea to enable a greater amount of shitcoin spam on the bitcoin network.

Obviously that is very bad. When developers can be so easily manipulated by big money that is not a good sign.

We are back at this place again, I could remember during the ordinals and inscriptions period where there the network was congested and hike the transaction fee then, and many people were actually requesting for protocols like this shouldn’t be allowed on bitcoin some actually suggest that maybe a lesser portion of the block be available for them only. But what many are saying is if you decide to actually stop the development of this protocols on bitcoin network or place some limitations wouldn’t that be more like censorship that we ran away from in traditional currency.

So if someone were to pay the developers to raise the bitcoin hard cap from 21 million coins to 10 billion coins you are fine with that?

You have a strange definition of censorship. Making rules to prevent people from littering or taking a dump on the public streets is not censorship
in my book. Spam filters used by email to prevent junk from filling up your inbox is not censorship.

[Hatchy]

The number one reason why Bitcoin was created was for financial freedom, how people can save, store, and trade, it wasn't created to be controlled by anyone, Bitcoin is still decentralized but not that decentralized in physical,  reason being that only few mining pools and capable holders control a large part of it.
Note: that nobody can control Bitcoin not even the government or companies but they have little Price influence on it.

Bitcoin is still decentralised regardless. I'll agree with you on the part of price manipulation. The silent war I've long feared is now playing out in plain sight, which is the the calculated accumulation by institutions and even governments. They aren't just buying up bitcoins because they want to adopt it, they're trying to buy their way to dominance, cornering massive supplies of BTC. They can actually in a way weaponize their capital to swing the market at will. We've seen this alot this year and it wasn't nice. So many insiders buying and selling at will, making profits off other peoples investments..

The painful irony? We can't actually stop it without fundamentally undermining the very principle we seek to protect. Decentralization means no central authority dictates who can buy how much. They have the same freedom we have to accumulate bitcoin but their motive may be quite different..

[uchegod-21]

I hate to admit that bitcoin is somehow losing some of the attributes we all held at high esteem to be the benefit of decentralization. Truly, freedom is gradually fading away with the introduction of exchanges and the involvement of the governments who try to control bitcoiners through the exchanges. Now people have to go through KYC processes and monitoring of funds that go in and out of a person's wallet. The beauty of Bitcoin lies in self-custody. We won't be having these issues if we all transact directly from the blockchain without the need for exchanges.

Well, we should just be thankful that no single person can put an end to p2p, seize bitcoins from a person's wallet without authorisation or alter codes.

[un_rank]

Anyone can own as many bitcoins as they can afford. That is the true meaning of decentralization which will lead to those with the higher purchasing power owning more bitcoins, but you can own any amount you can afford and keep that away from anyone until you plan to sell.

...the mining pools are still up to or more than 10 while there are solo miners that are still mining blocks.

Only the top 4 mining pools control 70% of the hashrate and when you add the 2 remaining it goes as high as 85%. That is as centralized as it gets and also growing as more people join the top pools. The only fail-safe in this situation is that the pools are motivated to act right otherwise they can be ignored by the network.

- Jay -

[Bitcoin Smith]

Decentralization and few mining pools control the majority of the hash power got some relation, but what it has to do with price influence?

Bitcoin can't be controlled and fewer mining pools doesn't necessarily mean it will just be like that, the governments with more restrictions and more difficulty forced the miners to operate from certain regions where the electricity is cheaper or the environment is in favor of them that is why over the years how miners been a part of the networks evolved too.

[BitBakerr1]

Note: that nobody can control Bitcoin not even the government or companies but they have little Price influence on it.

Yes you are actually correct Bitcoin is not controlled by the government or any organization however with the amount of Bitcoin that some country or organization have in their reserve they can actually influence the price of Bitcoin there are some countries that are holding very huge amount of Bitcoin in their reserve if they decide to sell it today the price of Bitcoin will go down it will really affect the price of Bitcoin and this is how they can influence bitcoin price when they also decide to accumulate huge amount of Bitcoin it will help to increase the price of Bitcoin, so these are the ways that this companies or countries have influence in Bitcoin price, however the influence cannot lead to the fall of Bitcoin no matter who sells his bitcoin today Bitcoin will keep growing, it may dip for some time but it will surely go higher again because there are large number of Bitcoin believer world wide.

[Donneski]

Op, I see where you’re coming from. Bitcoin’s vision right from inception was freedom from control and in that sense, it hasn’t changed, no government or company can shut it down, this I can authoritatively tell you.

Of a truth, over time, mining centralization and large holders have made it feel a bit less community-driven than in the early days. Maybe the next phase of adoption will focus on spreading that control more evenly again.

[Miles2006]

Bitcoin volatility state can as well give the wrong impression about bitcoin privacy, whenever the government try to control the price either negatively or positively the market seems to fluctuate at the moment due to hype. For example president Trump mentioned his support concerning bitcoin and the massive traffic gotten was surprising. Bitcoin is decentralized as mentioned and no one can control bitcoin or rather convert bitcoin privacy as banking system.