|
lg15x (OP)
|
 |
June 04, 2014, 03:27:00 AM |
|
I read this report on coindesk. http://www.coindesk.com/private-china-meeting-bitcoin-mining-industry-leaders/This is the question: Is Bitcoin still Decentralized? Or just like some people represent Federal Reserve of Bitcoin? So why merchant accepts Bitcoin and put their money in risk of New Federal Reserve? PoS, Proof of Stake, has been brought to the world by Peercoin(PPC) almost 2 years. How many people think about this? What's your opinion? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is a common myth that Bitcoin is ruled by a majority of miners. This is not true. Bitcoin miners "vote" on the ordering of transactions, but that's all they do. They can't vote to change the network rules.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
Ron~Popeil
|
|
June 04, 2014, 03:29:06 AM |
|
Of course it is. No one controls it and it can't be destroyed. The concentration of hash rate in one country is something that might need to be addressed in the future but the currency functions just fine.
|
|
|
|
PHP.guru
Member
 Offline
Activity: 154
Merit: 10
|
|
June 04, 2014, 03:52:15 AM |
|
The mining pools are pretty centralized so I wouldn't really say it's decentralized.
|
|
|
|
twistyfy
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
June 04, 2014, 03:57:02 AM |
|
I read this report on coindesk. http://www.coindesk.com/private-china-meeting-bitcoin-mining-industry-leaders/This is the question: Is Bitcoin still Decentralized? Or just like some people represent Federal Reserve of Bitcoin? So why merchant accepts Bitcoin and put their money in risk of New Federal Reserve? PoS, Proof of Stake, has been brought to the world by Peercoin(PPC) almost 2 years. How many people think about this? What's your opinion? It absolutely is |
|
|
|
|
|
lg15x (OP)
|
|
June 04, 2014, 03:57:21 AM |
|
Of course it is. No one controls it and it can't be destroyed. The concentration of hash rate in one country is something that might need to be addressed in the future but the currency functions just fine.
I cannot agree. This time "People in that room represented over 50% of the world’s bitcoin miner production". How about next time? 75%? If "People in that room" make a decision to do short for bitcoin, and they may hold short on exchanges, what can we do? |
|
|
|
|
|
Ron~Popeil
|
|
June 04, 2014, 04:04:25 AM |
|
Of course it is. No one controls it and it can't be destroyed. The concentration of hash rate in one country is something that might need to be addressed in the future but the currency functions just fine.
I cannot agree. This time "People in that room represented over 50% of the world’s bitcoin miner production". How about next time? 75%? If "People in that room" make a decision to do short for bitcoin, and they may hold short on exchanges, what can we do? Like I said the concentration of hashing power in one country might be something that needs to be addressed but mining is only half the game. Also they can't really do much with it other than mine coins. It would take a huge effort to coordinate them to do something nefarious. Chinese exchanges have been effecting price for a while now. If they all decide to short the price would adjust. To damage bit coin runs counter to their interests. |
|
|
|
|
lg15x (OP)
|
|
June 04, 2014, 04:14:19 AM |
|
Of course it is. No one controls it and it can't be destroyed. The concentration of hash rate in one country is something that might need to be addressed in the future but the currency functions just fine.
I cannot agree. This time "People in that room represented over 50% of the world’s bitcoin miner production". How about next time? 75%? If "People in that room" make a decision to do short for bitcoin, and they may hold short on exchanges, what can we do? Like I said the concentration of hashing power in one country might be something that needs to be addressed but mining is only half the game. Also they can't really do much with it other than mine coins. It would take a huge effort to coordinate them to do something nefarious. Chinese exchanges have been effecting price for a while now. If they all decide to short the price would adjust. To damage bit coin runs counter to their interests. Do you know the margin trading on Bitfinex? Do you know the future trading of bitcoin? And if some big players have just sold out in high price? I have to say, there's many ways to benefit from shorting the price. |
|
|
|
|
|
luffy
|
|
June 04, 2014, 05:01:05 AM |
|
gathering mining power in "one" place is really a problem. BTC needs to implement PoS to avoid this risk. truly decentralized coin is the coin that their users can mine it also  |
|
|
|
|
|
Ron~Popeil
|
|
June 04, 2014, 05:08:47 AM |
|
gathering mining power in "one" place is really a problem. BTC needs to implement PoS to avoid this risk. truly decentralized coin is the coin that their users can mine it also PoS is an intriguing idea but would have to be very limited to avoid inflating the currency. Maybe it could be tied to the average number of confirmed lost coins per year. |
|
|
|
harveyweizhao
Member
Offline
Activity: 110
Merit: 10
|
|
June 04, 2014, 05:11:03 AM |
|
Of course it is. No one controls it and it can't be destroyed. The concentration of hash rate in one country is something that might need to be addressed in the future but the currency functions just fine.
In short terms it should be fine with some centralized mining power in POW coin. But if we look forward after 5 years, it could be a disaster for the whole community. |
|
|
|
|
lg15x (OP)
|
|
June 05, 2014, 03:24:06 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jc01480
|
|
June 05, 2014, 03:30:35 AM |
|
Does it matter? If the Federal Reserve wants to get in on the game, they'll create their own crypto. Backed by fiat, that has more appeal to the masses, creditors, governments, etc. That is what we are facing. We are in competition, people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
beetcoin
|
|
June 05, 2014, 03:38:49 AM |
|
Does it matter? If the Federal Reserve wants to get in on the game, they'll create their own crypto. Backed by fiat, that has more appeal to the masses, creditors, governments, etc. That is what we are facing. We are in competition, people.
so where are you getting this information? part of the reason that bitcoin became so popular was because it is untethered to government. |
|
|
|
|
|
twiifm
|
|
June 05, 2014, 03:44:36 AM |
|
By definition it is "decentralized".
But it can be "monopolized" by a dominant group
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marlo Stanfield
|
|
June 05, 2014, 03:57:17 AM |
|
Of course it is. No one controls it and it can't be destroyed. The concentration of hash rate in one country is something that might need to be addressed in the future but the currency functions just fine.
I cannot agree. This time "People in that room represented over 50% of the world’s bitcoin miner production". How about next time? 75%? If "People in that room" make a decision to do short for bitcoin, and they may hold short on exchanges, what can we do? Like I said the concentration of hashing power in one country might be something that needs to be addressed but mining is only half the game. Also they can't really do much with it other than mine coins. It would take a huge effort to coordinate them to do something nefarious. Chinese exchanges have been effecting price for a while now. If they all decide to short the price would adjust. To damage bit coin runs counter to their interests. I'm pretty sure if someone asked Satoshi 4-5 years ago if it would be ok to have meetings of over half the hash power of the network he would say that he never intended such things and that it's a problem that should be solved. Hell, he didn't even foresee mining pools from what I remember. His original intention was everyone using their CPU and having the client running to generate coins. |
|
|
|
|
|
jc01480
|
|
June 05, 2014, 04:05:57 AM |
|
Does it matter? If the Federal Reserve wants to get in on the game, they'll create their own crypto. Backed by fiat, that has more appeal to the masses, creditors, governments, etc. That is what we are facing. We are in competition, people.
so where are you getting this information? part of the reason that bitcoin became so popular was because it is untethered to government. Low level person. He queried about it. Seems his knowledge about it is developed so far along that the rig has been built just no politician pulling the tdis |
|
|
|
|
|
Ron~Popeil
|
|
June 05, 2014, 06:55:09 AM |
|
Of course it is. No one controls it and it can't be destroyed. The concentration of hash rate in one country is something that might need to be addressed in the future but the currency functions just fine.
I cannot agree. This time "People in that room represented over 50% of the world’s bitcoin miner production". How about next time? 75%? If "People in that room" make a decision to do short for bitcoin, and they may hold short on exchanges, what can we do? Like I said the concentration of hashing power in one country might be something that needs to be addressed but mining is only half the game. Also they can't really do much with it other than mine coins. It would take a huge effort to coordinate them to do something nefarious. Chinese exchanges have been effecting price for a while now. If they all decide to short the price would adjust. To damage bit coin runs counter to their interests. I'm pretty sure if someone asked Satoshi 4-5 years ago if it would be ok to have meetings of over half the hash power of the network he would say that he never intended such things and that it's a problem that should be solved. Hell, he didn't even foresee mining pools from what I remember. His original intention was everyone using their CPU and having the client running to generate coins. I am not sure Satoshi ever thought his experiment would get so big in the first place. If someone did manage to organize all of that hashing power into some sort of attack the block chain can always be forked and previous transactions would still be valid. |
|
|
|
|
Marlo Stanfield
|
|
June 05, 2014, 03:51:39 PM |
|
Of course it is. No one controls it and it can't be destroyed. The concentration of hash rate in one country is something that might need to be addressed in the future but the currency functions just fine.
I cannot agree. This time "People in that room represented over 50% of the world’s bitcoin miner production". How about next time? 75%? If "People in that room" make a decision to do short for bitcoin, and they may hold short on exchanges, what can we do? Like I said the concentration of hashing power in one country might be something that needs to be addressed but mining is only half the game. Also they can't really do much with it other than mine coins. It would take a huge effort to coordinate them to do something nefarious. Chinese exchanges have been effecting price for a while now. If they all decide to short the price would adjust. To damage bit coin runs counter to their interests. I'm pretty sure if someone asked Satoshi 4-5 years ago if it would be ok to have meetings of over half the hash power of the network he would say that he never intended such things and that it's a problem that should be solved. Hell, he didn't even foresee mining pools from what I remember. His original intention was everyone using their CPU and having the client running to generate coins. I am not sure Satoshi ever thought his experiment would get so big in the first place. If someone did manage to organize all of that hashing power into some sort of attack the block chain can always be forked and previous transactions would still be valid. I don't know. I think he knew that there was a possibility for it to become this big. With how much care he took in hiding his identity and leaving bitcoin when he did. I think he thought there was a chance it would take off and he really didn't want to be the leader and the one responsible for bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
|
Ron~Popeil
|
|
June 05, 2014, 04:11:03 PM |
|
Of course it is. No one controls it and it can't be destroyed. The concentration of hash rate in one country is something that might need to be addressed in the future but the currency functions just fine.
I cannot agree. This time "People in that room represented over 50% of the world’s bitcoin miner production". How about next time? 75%? If "People in that room" make a decision to do short for bitcoin, and they may hold short on exchanges, what can we do? Like I said the concentration of hashing power in one country might be something that needs to be addressed but mining is only half the game. Also they can't really do much with it other than mine coins. It would take a huge effort to coordinate them to do something nefarious. Chinese exchanges have been effecting price for a while now. If they all decide to short the price would adjust. To damage bit coin runs counter to their interests. I'm pretty sure if someone asked Satoshi 4-5 years ago if it would be ok to have meetings of over half the hash power of the network he would say that he never intended such things and that it's a problem that should be solved. Hell, he didn't even foresee mining pools from what I remember. His original intention was everyone using their CPU and having the client running to generate coins. I am not sure Satoshi ever thought his experiment would get so big in the first place. If someone did manage to organize all of that hashing power into some sort of attack the block chain can always be forked and previous transactions would still be valid. I don't know. I think he knew that there was a possibility for it to become this big. With how much care he took in hiding his identity and leaving bitcoin when he did. I think he thought there was a chance it would take off and he really didn't want to be the leader and the one responsible for bitcoin. It is an interesting question. He is the one person in the history of the world I would choose to have a beer with if I had a genie to make it happen. It would be fascinating to know what he thought this would become and whether or not it is anything like his original vision. |
|
|
|
|
Beliathon
|
|
June 05, 2014, 05:20:27 PM |
|
Of course it is. No one controls it and it can't be destroyed. The concentration of hash rate in one country is something that might need to be addressed in the future but the currency functions just fine.
I cannot agree. This time "People in that room represented over 50% of the world’s bitcoin miner production". How about next time? 75%? If "People in that room" make a decision to do short for bitcoin, and they may hold short on exchanges, what can we do?  |
|
|
|
|
Operatr
|
|
June 05, 2014, 05:33:03 PM |
|
Bitcoin is anything but decentralized, as it runs on top of:
Centralized ISPs
Centralized energy
Now mining is becoming centralized more and more by big players
Most Bitcoin services and exchanges are private, centralized entities.
We have a long way to go to say the least. We must decentralize it all, though I think Bitcoin itself is the catalyst for this to actually happen.
|
|
|
|
|
lg15x (OP)
|
|
June 06, 2014, 03:13:48 AM |
|
I am very, very, very much shocked when I read this: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/279sex/ghashio_double_spending/I really need to think about that, to sell my Bitcoin for Peercoin. I've bought some Peercoin when I found out the problems of PoW. PoS is innovation of Peercoin, and Peercoin really did a good job in last 2 years. I still will hold some bitcoins, because I believe bitcoin can fix this by using PoS sometime in the future. And Peercoin community will help. |
|
|
|
|
|
Marlo Stanfield
|
|
June 06, 2014, 02:08:35 PM |
|
Bitcoin is anything but decentralized, as it runs on top of:
Centralized ISPs
Centralized energy
Now mining is becoming centralized more and more by big players
Most Bitcoin services and exchanges are private, centralized entities.
We have a long way to go to say the least. We must decentralize it all, though I think Bitcoin itself is the catalyst for this to actually happen.
How are ISPs centralised? Or energy for that matter. Especially energy. Isn't there a mining operation that uses geothermal energy? That's anything but centralised. |
|
|
|
|
Beyonce
Member
Offline
Activity: 86
Merit: 10
Surfbort.
|
|
June 06, 2014, 02:12:08 PM |
|
Bitcoin is anything but decentralized, as it runs on top of:
Centralized ISPs
Centralized energy
Now mining is becoming centralized more and more by big players
Most Bitcoin services and exchanges are private, centralized entities.
We have a long way to go to say the least. We must decentralize it all, though I think Bitcoin itself is the catalyst for this to actually happen.
I don't think any of that makes it centralised at all. |
Bow down, bitches.
|
|
|
|
Ron~Popeil
|
|
June 06, 2014, 03:11:45 PM |
|
I am very, very, very much shocked when I read this: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/279sex/ghashio_double_spending/I really need to think about that, to sell my Bitcoin for Peercoin. I've bought some Peercoin when I found out the problems of PoW. PoS is innovation of Peercoin, and Peercoin really did a good job in last 2 years. I still will hold some bitcoins, because I believe bitcoin can fix this by using PoS sometime in the future. And Peercoin community will help. [/quote I like peercoin. It is innovative and will probably have a future along side bit coin. There seems to be not a lot of support for it right now from outside a core group of holders though. If they would promote it and update it more often I would hold some. |
|
|
|
|
