Bitcoin Forum
November 21, 2017, 02:21:52 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Should Everything Be Decentralized?  (Read 4109 times)
Q7
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448


View Profile WWW
February 22, 2015, 01:11:32 AM
 #21

I prefer decentralization based the basis that nobody can controls it or shut it down. Based on that reason alone any other justification may not be important. That's how I think...

1511274112
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511274112

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511274112
Reply with quote  #2

1511274112
Report to moderator
Join ICO Now A blockchain platform for effective freelancing
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511274112
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511274112

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511274112
Reply with quote  #2

1511274112
Report to moderator
BCwinning
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658


View Profile
February 22, 2015, 01:26:05 AM
 #22

I just read an interesting quote from satoshi that dannyhamilton posted in another thread concerning the number of nodes.
Basically satoshi really didn't intend bitcoin to be completely decentralized.
He expected huge server farms to be left to run the nodes. While everyone else runs a light wallet and synchs with
one of possibly a hundred server farm nodes.
I think a digital currency needs to be decentralized more myself or it's just playing into the hands of a one world government.
Where all citizens have a ipv6 address and everything is connected to their address like americas SS #
Your wallet will be generated against your IPv6 addy and all transactions will be credited/debited through this.
sounds kind of sci-fi tin hat huh?

https://www.rixty.com?ref=1337507 sign up for rixty
privacy, it does the body good.
Official Bitcoin Foundation Secretariat
The New World Order thanks you for your support of Bitcoin and encourages your continuing support so that they may track your expenditures easier.
MarihuanaStocks
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42

Invest in real value!


View Profile WWW
February 22, 2015, 02:27:16 AM
 #23

All things are relative. Dogmatism is always proved to failure.(And even this sentence proves itself as false and is self-contradictory. Smiley )

When i talk about centralisation, it often concerns centralisation of power.
When you delegate power and centralise it in to the hands of one person, it
often happens and happened that this person uses the power to do bad things.

When you centralise money supply and the issuer can legally force the people to
use his money as legal-money, you create a dangerous monopole. Dangerous for
the wealth of those who use this money. How long are governments printing money to decrease their dept and for reasons of "economic stimulation"?
Think of something named "Cantillon-effect".

Centralisation often makes that you depend on a monopole. That is simply not good! In this context you can speak of decentralisation as free market-competition.

Everything has it's pros and contras. So has decentralisation.
But when it comes to terms or issues like money and power, centralisation leads to a unreasonable hierachy that very often "makes some more equal than others"!

moriartybitcoin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560

★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!


View Profile
February 22, 2015, 03:26:04 AM
 #24

yes, absolutely EVERYTHING needs to be decentralized

HELP.org
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 508



View Profile WWW
February 22, 2015, 01:29:33 PM
 #25

I just read an interesting quote from satoshi that dannyhamilton posted in another thread concerning the number of nodes.
Basically satoshi really didn't intend bitcoin to be completely decentralized.
He expected huge server farms to be left to run the nodes. While everyone else runs a light wallet and synchs with
one of possibly a hundred server farm nodes.
I think a digital currency needs to be decentralized more myself or it's just playing into the hands of a one world government.
Where all citizens have a ipv6 address and everything is connected to their address like americas SS #
Your wallet will be generated against your IPv6 addy and all transactions will be credited/debited through this.
sounds kind of sci-fi tin hat huh?


It does not matter.  What matters is the consensus moving forward.  Bitcoin is about decentralization and not depending on one person or thing.  Some people treat Bitcoin like some kind of religion and Satoshi as some kind of "prophet."   Clearly, Satoshi did not view himself that way and he didn't want all this drama and nonsense surrounding one individual. 

Certified Bitcoin Professional
Bicoin.me - Bitcoin.me!
HELP.org
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 508



View Profile WWW
February 22, 2015, 01:31:56 PM
 #26

yes, absolutely EVERYTHING needs to be decentralized

Comments like these show you many are completely clueless about what decentralization is and how it works.  These people should be enrolled in that Princeton class instead of posting nonsense on discussion boards.

Certified Bitcoin Professional
Bicoin.me - Bitcoin.me!
Rum152
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 147

www.secondstrade.com - 190% return Binary option


View Profile
February 22, 2015, 02:01:16 PM
 #27

The other day I was thinking bitcoin itself is decentralized, but everything around it is centralized or striving towards being centralized. Let's just take a look at this forum for example. Here are certain people in such power that if they decide, they can destroy you - your forum nickname. Members with trust can give you negative trust for no reason and you have no way to fight against that. Admins can ban you with no reason. Isn't that the principle of "centralization" - a few people having power to do anything and with no justified reasons?

HELP.org
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 508



View Profile WWW
February 22, 2015, 02:35:16 PM
 #28

The other day I was thinking bitcoin itself is decentralized, but everything around it is centralized or striving towards being centralized. Let's just take a look at this forum for example. Here are certain people in such power that if they decide, they can destroy you - your forum nickname. Members with trust can give you negative trust for no reason and you have no way to fight against that. Admins can ban you with no reason. Isn't that the principle of "centralization" - a few people having power to do anything and with no justified reasons?

But on the other hand if you want to get something done you have to achieve a consensus of all the participants.  That is slow and expensive and the world would essentially come to a halt if everything were done that way.  Everybody involved should try mining and see how difficult and expensive it is and if you use Bitcoin for any length of time you run up against confirmation issues.  It taking too long to be viable in certain use cases and people substitute centralized services (Bitpay, coinbase, etc.) to compensate for that. 

Certified Bitcoin Professional
Bicoin.me - Bitcoin.me!
Beymond
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462



View Profile
February 22, 2015, 03:58:56 PM
 #29

centralization have it's own advantages and it's pretty good with it Smiley
manselr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826


Enjin Coin - Smart Cryptocurrency for Gaming.


View Profile
February 22, 2015, 10:54:41 PM
 #30

yes, absolutely EVERYTHING needs to be decentralized

Comments like these show you many are completely clueless about what decentralization is and how it works.  These people should be enrolled in that Princeton class instead of posting nonsense on discussion boards.
Most are delusional anarcho capitalists like Jeff Berwick.

HELP.org
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 508



View Profile WWW
February 23, 2015, 03:14:14 AM
 #31

yes, absolutely EVERYTHING needs to be decentralized

Comments like these show you many are completely clueless about what decentralization is and how it works.  These people should be enrolled in that Princeton class instead of posting nonsense on discussion boards.
Most are delusional anarcho capitalists like Jeff Berwick.

If someone calls themselves an "anarcho capitalist" you know right away they are not credible.  If you had anarchy it would not be possible to be a capitalist because they would not be able to protect the property that is amassed (except by force).  In any case it is a waste of time to argue with those people as they will just go on forever and constantly point to some kind of reference that "proves" they are right.  They fall into categories:  Young people who don't know any better, scammers or tax cheats, and mentally ill.  They make it difficult to promote Bitcoin but as it becomes popular those types will be pushed to the side.  Places like Jerry Brito and Coin Center and the involvement of Universities like Princeton will change the face of Bitcoin over time.   You may notice this forum has gone way down in importance mostly because of the nut jobs who run the site.


Certified Bitcoin Professional
Bicoin.me - Bitcoin.me!
develCuy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 243


View Profile WWW
February 23, 2015, 03:43:46 AM
 #32

How about thinking on operating by standards fruit of consensus? I mean, distributed in a way that not only individuals but groups that share same interest/needs define their own rules. Coinbase.com is not a good example, it is a closed service where a privileged groups define everything, if there is no power to refund, then how can we get protected? I like how cooperatives work, we need a network of cooperatives that create services and goods, that operate under standards and where decisions are taken by consensus. Just my 2c.

Daniel91
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288



View Profile
February 23, 2015, 10:27:34 AM
 #33

yes, absolutely EVERYTHING needs to be decentralized

This is very idealistic thinking.
It's not possibly really, not for all aspects of human life, like politics, public service, banking etc.
Bitcoin is great example of decentralization but such model can't work in every area of human life.

MarihuanaStocks
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42

Invest in real value!


View Profile WWW
February 23, 2015, 11:17:06 AM
 #34

yes, absolutely EVERYTHING needs to be decentralized

Comments like these show you many are completely clueless about what decentralization is and how it works.  These people should be enrolled in that Princeton class instead of posting nonsense on discussion boards.
Most are delusional anarcho capitalists like Jeff Berwick.

If someone calls themselves an "anarcho capitalist" you know right away they are not credible.  If you had anarchy it would not be possible to be a capitalist because they would not be able to protect the property that is amassed (except by force).  In any case it is a waste of time to argue with those people as they will just go on forever and constantly point to some kind of reference that "proves" they are right.  They fall into categories:  Young people who don't know any better, scammers or tax cheats, and mentally ill.  They make it difficult to promote Bitcoin but as it becomes popular those types will be pushed to the side.  Places like Jerry Brito and Coin Center and the involvement of Universities like Princeton will change the face of Bitcoin over time.   You may notice this forum has gone way down in importance mostly because of the nut jobs who run the site.



If someone talks about "anarcho-capitalism" he talkes of decentralisation. If someone talks of Socialism he is talking about centralisation. Let me guess: You see liberalism as something bad, something that must be regulated to sustain?
Or one of those that don't know what capitalism means, so they call it fascism, because they do not know what that is either? Smiley

Anarcho-capitalism means that you need no state-regulations. Everything can be negotiated between free market members.It bases upon the non-aggression principle. Nobody is allowed to hurt another person, because it violates their rights. But you are right, there would be no state authority, to watch after individual rights. It would be a private one! Which is much more efficient, credible and works consumer-oriented. In fact state authority will never manage to do that Wink

But i guess you knew that allready.


TYT
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 78


View Profile
February 23, 2015, 01:06:45 PM
 #35

I don't think everything should be decentralized obviously, but there are certain things that should be like marketplaces and exchanges.

I prefer decentralization based the basis that nobody can controls it or shut it down. Based on that reason alone any other justification may not be important. That's how I think...

But there's an opposite to this. What happens when there are certain situations or scenarios where not being able to shut something down are a bad thing? What happens then?
MarihuanaStocks
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42

Invest in real value!


View Profile WWW
February 23, 2015, 01:24:22 PM
 #36

The other day I was thinking bitcoin itself is decentralized, but everything around it is centralized or striving towards being centralized. Let's just take a look at this forum for example. Here are certain people in such power that if they decide, they can destroy you - your forum nickname. Members with trust can give you negative trust for no reason and you have no way to fight against that. Admins can ban you with no reason. Isn't that the principle of "centralization" - a few people having power to do anything and with no justified reasons?

But on the other hand if you want to get something done you have to achieve a consensus of all the participants.  That is slow and expensive and the world would essentially come to a halt if everything were done that way.  Everybody involved should try mining and see how difficult and expensive it is and if you use Bitcoin for any length of time you run up against confirmation issues.  It taking too long to be viable in certain use cases and people substitute centralized services (Bitpay, coinbase, etc.) to compensate for that. 

Consent may be slow, but it's absolutely necessary.

From a semi-technical point:

Maybe it takes longer to reach a consent, but consent is the most important component in a free and peaceful society. If power got centralized a hierarchy is created.

The main problem here is our holy-grail-decision-principle : Democracy! Democracy is like a permanent 51% attack that is accepted as legit!

Democracy is a dictatorship of the majority and stands therefor diametrical opposed to any form of freedom, not to talk about any free decisions.

If we want freedom and sustainability, we need to do things in a sociocratic way. That says that the the vote of the majority has the equal value to the minority's vote.

What does that mean?

The people find something, a foundation, a consent, that brings them together. Everything above that consent has to be done on their own. For example: 20 people buy a farm and want to produce their food by themselves. Ironically there are 11 people that eat meat, 9 do not. What might happen in a democratically oriented system? Everyone pays for meat production because the majority decides to do so. In a sociocratic system they have a common foundation, the farm and the support of the community. So the decision would look like following (maybe): You find synergies in both projects and meat eaters support meat production, vegetarians finance vegetable production. Where both projects can work together, they do. Like use the same house to produce their products...asf.

So,when you talk about decentralization,don't forget that democracy is not compatible with that.

Democracy does one thing for sure: It produces hatred, strife and violence. It's just a matter of time.

redsn0w
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274


# Free market


View Profile
February 23, 2015, 01:38:27 PM
 #37

Maybe the anarchy is not so "bad" , the actual democracy (with this economic system) has failed. Bitcoin is a revolution and at the end I'm sure it will succeed. As MarihuanaStocks told (and this is true):

Democracy is a dictatorship of the majority and stands therefor diametrical opposed to any form of freedom, not to talk about any free decisions.
ChuckBuck
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588



View Profile
February 23, 2015, 03:14:38 PM
 #38

No, not everything should be decentralized.  Bitcoin, the currency and protocol, itself is inherently decentralized, but doesn't mean the applications, systems, and companies surrounding Bitcoin has to be decentralized.

IE Coinbase, Circle, BitPay, Gemini, COIN ETF all being centralized companies or services, but support Bitcoin the currency/protocol.

It doesn't have to be an absolute thing, it can be a hybrid give and take system.

██
█║█
║║║
║║║
█║█
██
'BTC MULTI-WALLET SOON'
▬▬▬▬ Download WHITEPAPER ▬▬▬▬

                    ▄██▄
                  ▄██████▄
                ▄██████████
              ▄██████████▀   ▄▄
            ▄██████████▀   ▄████▄
          ▄██████████▀    ████████▄
         ██████████▀      ▀████████
         ▀███████▀   ▄███▄  ▀████▀   ▄█▄
    ▄███▄  ▀███▀   ▄███████▄  ▀▀   ▄█████▄
  ▄███████▄      ▄██████████     ▄█████████
  █████████    ▄██████████▀    ▄██████████▀
   ▀█████▀   ▄██████████▀    ▄██████████▀
     ▀▀▀   ▄██████████▀    ▄██████████▀
          ██████████▀    ▄██████████▀
          ▀███████▀      █████████▀
            ▀███▀   ▄██▄  ▀█████▀
                  ▄██████▄  ▀▀▀
                  █████████
                   ▀█████▀
                     ▀▀▀
e i d o o
██

███▀▀
▐▐▌
▐▌
▐▌
▐▐▌
███▄▄
▀▀███
▐▌▌
▐▌
▐▌
▐▌▌
▄▄███
BADecker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484


View Profile
February 23, 2015, 05:31:26 PM
 #39

Not everything should be decentralized. Why not? If it all were decentralized, nobody would own any private property. If nobody owned any private property, he wouldn't even own himself. If he didn't own himself, and there was no decentralization, nobody could own him, and he essentially couldn't do anything.

Let decentralization exist only for the things that people have joint agreements about, and only the kinds of joint agreements that are written down. Otherwise decentralization will become a massive socialism worse than even the greatest socialism of Russia and China combined.

Smiley
HELP.org
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 508



View Profile WWW
February 24, 2015, 02:28:40 AM
 #40

The other day I was thinking bitcoin itself is decentralized, but everything around it is centralized or striving towards being centralized. Let's just take a look at this forum for example. Here are certain people in such power that if they decide, they can destroy you - your forum nickname. Members with trust can give you negative trust for no reason and you have no way to fight against that. Admins can ban you with no reason. Isn't that the principle of "centralization" - a few people having power to do anything and with no justified reasons?

But on the other hand if you want to get something done you have to achieve a consensus of all the participants.  That is slow and expensive and the world would essentially come to a halt if everything were done that way.  Everybody involved should try mining and see how difficult and expensive it is and if you use Bitcoin for any length of time you run up against confirmation issues.  It taking too long to be viable in certain use cases and people substitute centralized services (Bitpay, coinbase, etc.) to compensate for that. 

Consent may be slow, but it's absolutely necessary.

From a semi-technical point:

Maybe it takes longer to reach a consent, but consent is the most important component in a free and peaceful society. If power got centralized a hierarchy is created.

The main problem here is our holy-grail-decision-principle : Democracy! Democracy is like a permanent 51% attack that is accepted as legit!

Democracy is a dictatorship of the majority and stands therefor diametrical opposed to any form of freedom, not to talk about any free decisions.

If we want freedom and sustainability, we need to do things in a sociocratic way. That says that the the vote of the majority has the equal value to the minority's vote.

What does that mean?

The people find something, a foundation, a consent, that brings them together. Everything above that consent has to be done on their own. For example: 20 people buy a farm and want to produce their food by themselves. Ironically there are 11 people that eat meat, 9 do not. What might happen in a democratically oriented system? Everyone pays for meat production because the majority decides to do so. In a sociocratic system they have a common foundation, the farm and the support of the community. So the decision would look like following (maybe): You find synergies in both projects and meat eaters support meat production, vegetarians finance vegetable production. Where both projects can work together, they do. Like use the same house to produce their products...asf.

So,when you talk about decentralization,don't forget that democracy is not compatible with that.

Democracy does one thing for sure: It produces hatred, strife and violence. It's just a matter of time.

That is so far outside of reality it is not worth discussing and it really has nothing to do with Bitcoin.  Linking these discussions and cults to Bitcoin just makes Bitcoiners look ridiculous which is why I suggest taking the class. 

Certified Bitcoin Professional
Bicoin.me - Bitcoin.me!
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!