The single flaw in bitcoin

[tss]

+1 VTD!

[Soros Shorts]

Why would people trust these few operators to run the network, instead of for example big banks who issue their own "Bankcoin" on the bank's own servers?

And why would I trust the big Bank and their servers?

[seriouscoin]

The only flaw in bitcoin is it let ppl way below the IQ mean curve to join.....case in point:

The OP is stupid enough to think of Bankcoins.... as an alt crypto currency. The retard didnt even see his "USD" in his bank is exactly that "bankcoin". Why would they need a blockchain a "trustless distributed public ledger" when all they do is internal book keeping (the only miner is the bank)? Their current system is doing exactly that, processing tx and printing money (debt)


Yeah, the only flaw in bitcoin is user like you OP

[snobbus]

The post is not only about the possibility of a 51% attack, being centralized makes the whole network vulnerable if the big miners for some reason was shut down by regulators, among other risks.

If the big miners were shut down, difficulty would go down and everyone would start mining again. You do understand about difficulty, right?

Yes, I think this would happen as well, if the network persisted a shutdown. However, the main point is that I don't see the advantage a centralized bitcoin have over a centralized altcoin issued by a company. A company should be able to compete with a centralized bitcoin, since both the few bitcoin "mining factories", and the company who hosts the coin should be regulated in the same way. On top of that the company might have a built up userbase that will help that coin become larger than bitcoin.

[snobbus]

Why would people trust these few operators to run the network, instead of for example big banks who issue their own "Bankcoin" on the bank's own servers?

And why would I trust the big Bank and their servers?

I'm not saying that anyone would, what I'm saying is I don't see why people would trust a centralized bitcoin composed by only a few big "mining factories" more than they would trust a centralized coin issued by a company.

[snobbus]

The only flaw in bitcoin is it let ppl way below the IQ mean curve to join.....case in point:

The OP is stupid enough to think of Bankcoins.... as an alt crypto currency. The retard didnt even see his "USD" in his bank is exactly that "bankcoin". Why would they need a blockchain a "trustless distributed public ledger" when all they do is internal book keeping (the only miner is the bank)? Their current system is doing exactly that, processing tx and printing money (debt)


Yeah, the only flaw in bitcoin is user like you OP

Yes, a currency issued by a centralized entity is very similar to the bank's internal systems, which a centralized bitcoin would be as well, do you not agree?

If a centralized bitcoin has some benefits over the system they currently use, why do you not think they would issue their own coin with the same benefits, and why would people trust it less than a centralized bitcoin?

[amaclin]

If a centralized bitcoin has some benefits

No benefits.

[GhanaGamboy]

Yes, a currency issued by a centralized entity is very similar to the bank's internal systems, which a centralized bitcoin would be as well, do you not agree?

Bitcoin mining is somehow centralized many years since people started poiting their miners to pools, but Bitcoin itselves cannot be centralized, Bitcoin is based on trustless public ledger, very different from  currency issued by a centralized entity where the ledger is not public and obviously transactions can only be processed by centralized entity, because noone else have access to the ledger.

[vipgelsi]

If a centralized bitcoin has some benefits

No benefits.

Lower fees is a benefit.

[amaclin]

Lower fees is a benefit.

Bitcoin network needs energy. While the mining profits are covering electric bills the fees are low.
This can not be forever. Who will pay for electricity?

[CoinHoarder]

I agree with you OP but some people are in denial about the inevitability of Bitcoin's centralization. They will be their own undoing IMO, but time will tell. One thing I don't agree with you though is that this is the only flaw Bitcoin has. There are many flaws, being stubborn is one of them, as you will see momentarily as the Bitcoin zealots show up to put lipstick on their pig. It is sad that they are more worried about applying make up over the problems than fixing the issues. I was once a Bitcoin supporter, but I can't stand the stubbornness in the community anymore. I stick around here in hopes that they can come to a realization of reality.

[mlferro]

actually what  breaking the legs, is the power consumption

the energy companies  could give a discount to those with mining

[Kprawn]

There are loads of "solo miners" out there, who would be too glad, if the "Big miners" stop mining. When that happens, for whatever reason, the difficulty would go down, and a lot of solo miners, who stopped mining, or who is only doing it for a hobby, would start mining again.

We decided to back digital crypto currencies, for the ease of use, and the fact that we have control over our own money. {No more monthly banking fees, eating up your capital, month after month}

Even if only 2 people in the world, run a mining rig, will it still be seen as decentralized.

The way that the protocol are written, encourage more people to mine. {It's like a lottery, the more people playing the less the reward, but once only a few people play, the bigger the reward, and people knows this, so if these "big" companies exit for some reason, more people would get back in, to claim a bigger % of the reward}

[CoinHoarder]

Even if only 2 people in the world, run a mining rig, will it still be seen as decentralized.

No... Just no.

The way that the protocol are written, encourage more people to mine.

How can you convince them if it is unprofitable, as it has been since ASICs hit these scene?

[seriouscoin]

The only flaw in bitcoin is it let ppl way below the IQ mean curve to join.....case in point:

The OP is stupid enough to think of Bankcoins.... as an alt crypto currency. The retard didnt even see his "USD" in his bank is exactly that "bankcoin". Why would they need a blockchain a "trustless distributed public ledger" when all they do is internal book keeping (the only miner is the bank)? Their current system is doing exactly that, processing tx and printing money (debt)


Yeah, the only flaw in bitcoin is user like you OP

Yes, a currency issued by a centralized entity is very similar to the bank's internal systems, which a centralized bitcoin would be as well, do you not agree?

If a centralized bitcoin has some benefits over the system they currently use, why do you not think they would issue their own coin with the same benefits, and why would people trust it less than a centralized bitcoin?

Calling you a retard would be an insult to other retards out there.

There is no such thing as centralized bitcoin idiot. Having bitcoin mining centralized by several entities is inevitable and it doesnt not mean centralized bitcoin. From the moment i read about bitcoin, i see bitcoin mining will come to this due to simple economy if bitcoin ever takes off.

If one of these bitcoin entities do evil to the bitcoin network, the community would react and their mining power will be nullified. Now compared to a bank, where they can hold your fund, block transactions, what the fuck do you do? They're the only sole control of the coin.

[Kprawn]

Even if only 2 people in the world, run a mining rig, will it still be seen as decentralized.

No... Just no.

Why not, it's not a single "body" influencing the situation, if 2 or more people mine.

The way that the protocol are written, encourage more people to mine.

How can you convince them if it is unprofitable, as it has been since ASICs hit these scene?

The difficulty decrease, once the protocol adjust to the new time it takes to solve a block, does it not?

[CoinHoarder]

Even if only 2 people in the world, run a mining rig, will it still be seen as decentralized.

No... Just no.

Why not, it's not a single "body" influencing the situation, if 2 or more people mine.

The way that the protocol are written, encourage more people to mine.

How can you convince them if it is unprofitable, as it has been since ASICs hit these scene?

The difficulty decrease, once the protocol adjust to the new time it takes to solve a block, does it not?

.... What difficulty decrease? http://bitcoindifficulty.com/

[Kprawn]

The difficulty you posted, will show a increase, because the combined network power increased.  

Once the network power decrease, when the big companies leave, as in his hypothetical scenario, the difficulty will decrease. {Adapt to the change}

[Eisenhower34]

Yes, a currency issued by a centralized entity is very similar to the bank's internal systems, which a centralized bitcoin would be as well, do you not agree?

Bitcoin mining is somehow centralized many years since people started poiting their miners to pools, but Bitcoin itselves cannot be centralized, Bitcoin is based on trustless public ledger, very different from  currency issued by a centralized entity where the ledger is not public and obviously transactions can only be processed by centralized entity, because noone else have access to the ledger.

Pool mining does not equal centralized mining. The cost to switch pools is near zero and it is extremely easy to redirect a miner's hashpower to another pool. If/when a pool starts to act in a way that the miner does not agree with the owner of the miner needs to do little more then a few clicks to change pools.

As long as the above remains true, pooled mining will not be a threat to decentralization.

[CoinHoarder]

The difficulty you posted, will show a increase, because the combined network power increased.  

Once the network power decrease, when the big companies leave, as in his hypothetical scenario, the difficulty will decrease. {Adapt to the change}

Mining will be profitable for ASIC companies long after consumers. Due to economies of scale, they can build ASICs at a fraction of the price they sell them for, and thus expand their farms for very little costs. This idea that people (consumers) will keep mining even when incredibly unprofitable is crazy... What is the point when you can buy more Bitcoins with $100 than you can mine with $100 in electricity plus equipment costs? The ASIC manufacturers and huge mines are setting up in places with super cheap power and cheap operating expenses (cold places using nature to cool equipment), the average consumer cannot afford to do this.