Is Bitcoin not decentralized anymore?

[jc01480]

Ghash (Government hash?, as in g-man?). J/k. Lol

[S4VV4S]

The question should be:  is bitcoin decentralized enough?  The fact is when a new block is mined, that miner or pool has  limited control over what transactions get included in that block and subsequent blocks they mine.  Once another miner or pool mines another block, then the previous miner no longer has that limited control.  Also, once a block is mined, it is up to the rest of the network to agree to that broadcast block as the longest chain.  If other nodes on the network find a major problem with a block, then they will likely not accept that as the longest chain.  According to this site:  https://getaddr.bitnodes.io, bitcoin has 7859 nodes in 99 countries.  Nearly all have to agree on the longest chain.  I would call that decentralized enough. 

tldr; Each new block mined is subject to limited attack by the miner who mined it and subsequent blocks that same miner is able to mine.  However, with 7859 nodes in 99 countries, most of whom have to agree on the longest chain, bitcoin is decentralized enough.

So if I was to setup 8000 nodes would I then be able to disrupt things?

Yeah. Clearly not.

Why not?

Because your hashrate counts.

Sorry, you lost me.
Are you saying that the nodes with the most hashrate count more?

[ChuckOne]

So if I was to setup 8000 nodes would I then be able to disrupt things?

Yeah. Clearly not.

Why not?

Because your hashrate counts.

Sorry, you lost me.
Are you saying that the nodes with the most hashrate count more?

To disrupt things, yes.

[S4VV4S]

So if I was to setup 8000 nodes would I then be able to disrupt things?

Yeah. Clearly not.

Why not?

Because your hashrate counts.

Sorry, you lost me.
Are you saying that the nodes with the most hashrate count more?

To disrupt things, yes.

So, more or less it is centralized?

[ChuckOne]

So if I was to setup 8000 nodes would I then be able to disrupt things?

Yeah. Clearly not.

Why not?

Because your hashrate counts.

Sorry, you lost me.
Are you saying that the nodes with the most hashrate count more?

To disrupt things, yes.

So, more or less it is centralized?

Yeah, that is my impression here.

Then, I wanted to verify that and wanted to know how to remedy the situation.

[Azlan]

Ghash is back to 33%, you can go back to sleep now, nothing to see here.

They are hiding their real power.

I think the 51% we witnessed was a demonstration of power. I do not know for what reason.

They could have blocked miners as to keep their hash rates down as they did before, but they didn't.

I would say that GHash has MUCH more than 51%.

That being said, I do have some of my miners pointed at them.

EDIT: On the subject, NO, I don't believe that BTC is decentralized anymore.
In fact, the fact that we depend on the core dev team for anything means it is centralized, and from what I understand the core dev team is under the TBF orders.
Apart from that BTC mining is completely centralized.

WTF man! You think they have over 51% and you still point miners at them... Where is your logic?!?

Its a classic common resource problem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons

"... individuals, acting independently and rationally according to each one's self-interest, behave contrary to the whole group's long-term best interests by depleting some common resource."

Historically, only 2 viable solutions exist:
1) An authority to regulate (% in this case)
2) Privatization

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons#Modern_solutions

Pick your poison..... but be quick about it.

[porcupine87]

Ghash is back to 33%, you can go back to sleep now, nothing to see here.

They are hiding their real power.

I think the 51% we witnessed was a demonstration of power. I do not know for what reason.

They could have blocked miners as to keep their hash rates down as they did before, but they didn't.

I would say that GHash has MUCH more than 51%.

That being said, I do have some of my miners pointed at them.

EDIT: On the subject, NO, I don't believe that BTC is decentralized anymore.
In fact, the fact that we depend on the core dev team for anything means it is centralized, and from what I understand the core dev team is under the TBF orders.
Apart from that BTC mining is completely centralized.

WTF man! You think they have over 51% and you still point miners at them... Where is your logic?!?

Think about it, if they have more than 51% what is 720Gh going to do if I remove it from them?
720Gh means jack shit for hashing power. Apart from that I would like to at least get my investment back (which I didn't yet).
I also have more than that on other pools - I don't like to keep all my eggs in one basket

Because miners are egoistic. The Bitcoin network is not stable if you need altrusitic miners. So as a miner. Why do you use GHash and not another pool?

2. What is the real thread? Is a mining pool with 75% individual miners one entity? It depends. Can the pool fulfill double spendings which can't be recognized? I think that is pretty difficulty. So not only GHash as a company but all the miners have to ask themself: Do I profit in the long run to cheat the game?


Huge transactions. Only they can be profitable to cheat. So if you have a 51% majority and send someone 1000btc will the receiver wait 6 confirmations? This would be a 1.5% chance that GHash makes all 6 blocks. But even that is irrelevant. You don't buy a car and wait 6 confirmations. You make a fucking contract under the legal state of the country! You can't cheat that because you are not anonymous. You are only anonymous if you trade small amounts. And if not, it is your fault to get cheated...

[solid12345]

My question is has Bitcoin ever been decentralized? When 50 guys own 90% of the Bitcoins in the world is that decentralized?

[Justin00]

setup a new coin if you are so worried ?
add in fancy features that get people to use it ?
Its around 1am 16/06.. you could be the first alt coin that comes out on 16/06!

[S4VV4S]

Ghash is back to 33%, you can go back to sleep now, nothing to see here.

They are hiding their real power.

I think the 51% we witnessed was a demonstration of power. I do not know for what reason.

They could have blocked miners as to keep their hash rates down as they did before, but they didn't.

I would say that GHash has MUCH more than 51%.

That being said, I do have some of my miners pointed at them.

EDIT: On the subject, NO, I don't believe that BTC is decentralized anymore.
In fact, the fact that we depend on the core dev team for anything means it is centralized, and from what I understand the core dev team is under the TBF orders.
Apart from that BTC mining is completely centralized.

WTF man! You think they have over 51% and you still point miners at them... Where is your logic?!?

Its a classic common resource problem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons

"... individuals, acting independently and rationally according to each one's self-interest, behave contrary to the whole group's long-term best interests by depleting some common resource."

Historically, only 2 viable solutions exist:
1) An authority to regulate (% in this case)
2) Privatization

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons#Modern_solutions

Pick your poison..... but be quick about it.

When the whole group is controlled by a central authority it's no longer decentralized.
So, option 1 has been around for a while.
(Do you not read the news?)

Funny how one is considered selfish for wanting to ROI after seeing that our decentralized coin is more centralized than advertised.

None the less, thanks for the link, it was an interesting read.
Perhaps you should email that link to the core dev team and TBF and see what response you will get....

That being said, I hope that the core dev team does something and fast otherwise BTC is gone.
And I like the idea of it, just not the current implementation and hows things changed.

Satoshi must be very "proud" of us all.
  

[lihuajkl]

Ghash is back to 33%, you can go back to sleep now, nothing to see here.

the Ghash 51% hash power happened before. What I really concern is how to prevent them reach over 51% the next time. Otherwise the confidence to bitcoin is difficult to recover.

[S4VV4S]

Ghash is back to 33%, you can go back to sleep now, nothing to see here.

the Ghash 51% hash power happened before. What I really concern is how to prevent them reach over 51% the next time. Otherwise the confidence to bitcoin is difficult to recover.

That is a job for the core dev team.

All we can do is keep bugging them to do something about it before BTC dies.

[Marlo Stanfield]

Ghash is back to 33%, you can go back to sleep now, nothing to see here.

the Ghash 51% hash power happened before. What I really concern is how to prevent them reach over 51% the next time. Otherwise the confidence to bitcoin is difficult to recover.

Right. It's the threat that matters. Bitcoin was centralised. And it remains an issue as long as it's possible.

For all we know Ghash is still operating at over 50% hashrate.

[Lethn]

They are most likely rumors , nothing do to with the price no worry .

I care about perception right now.

If the crypto community tells the world: we have Bitcoin because it is decentralized (unlike banks) and in reality it is not, we will look like crooks.

Anyone who's done their research will know that's a load of bullshit, the open source nature of Bitcoin itself means that it is decentralised and there are hundreds of coins wanting to take it's place if it falls.

[ChuckOne]

They are most likely rumors , nothing do to with the price no worry .

I care about perception right now.

If the crypto community tells the world: we have Bitcoin because it is decentralized (unlike banks) and in reality it is not, we will look like crooks.

Anyone who's done their research will know that's a load of bullshit, the open source nature of Bitcoin itself means that it is decentralised and there are hundreds of coins wanting to take it's place if it falls.

I marked the false statement.

[ChuckOne]

Just to make that clear. Open source is open source. Decentralized is decentralized. Both terms do not imply each other in no regard.

[S4VV4S]

They are most likely rumors , nothing do to with the price no worry .

I care about perception right now.

If the crypto community tells the world: we have Bitcoin because it is decentralized (unlike banks) and in reality it is not, we will look like crooks.

Anyone who's done their research will know that's a load of bullshit, the open source nature of Bitcoin itself means that it is decentralised and there are hundreds of coins wanting to take it's place if it falls.

I marked the false statement.

I believe I agree with this.

It might be open source but Bitcoin core itself is controlled by a team and a foundation (and who knows who else).
So even though it is open source it is not decentralized.
And being open source doesn't mean jack shit at this point due to what I have just mentioned.

[LiteCoinUser84]

Agreed the core dev team have too much power and this is a real threat to the future of Bitcoin.

[ChuckOne]

It might be open source but Bitcoin core itself is controlled by a team and a foundation (and who knows who else).
So even though it is open source it is not decentralized.
And being open source doesn't mean jack shit at this point due to what I have just mentioned.

Exactly. The Bitcoin core that what is actually used in production.

No matter how great the open source nature of Bitcoin core is and how many variances of Bitcoin core exist, you either get a clone (with its own blockchain+network) or you get a Bitcoin core 2.0 with no network actually using it.

[HeliKopterBen]

Bottom line:  how many people have been the victim of a double spend?  I am not sure a case of a successful double spend exists post march 2013 fork.  BTC is still better than fiat.