Topic: Bitcoin cannot be decentralized if the Internet is centralized - page 2. (Read 1104 times)

Can the Internet become decentralized? This is possible but there may be a decrease in data transfer rates. Or the space is completely filled with internet satellites. This time the door of another system opens. I think this will happen. Bitcoin will also be fully independent.

I agree if bitcoin was centralized I think lot of people will lose interest on it because someone can control the value of it.  Not because internet is centralized means they can also control cryptocurrency becuase it was different.  But without internet we cant access and used cryptocurrency.

Surely there are a number of geniuses who would find some or the other war but I can actually not find any huge problem being this. as OP said, even if the Internet is Centralized it runs the Decentralized currencies commonly known as the Cryptocurrencies so it is not yet a problem.

Also, I do not think that any of the entities like the government of the ISP's might ever ruin the running and circulation of the decentralized currencies form the World Wide Web entirely as there are a number of things which could be used to keep the usage of cryptocurrencies into circulation. Internet is huge now and I do not really believe that someone might really have the access to each and every corner of internet so it might not be something to worry for us.

The internet might be centralized but this doesn't mean that bitcoin isn't decentralized too. Bitcoins are accessible with the use of internet but the technology supporting and improving bitcoin is what makes it decentralized. Moreover, internet is divided into several "servers" to support and to offer the fastest assistance so in a sense the internet is decentralized too.

Let's put it in another situation like this... It's like you're saying you can't achieve freedom because there is government controlling you with laws. But in reality, you still have freedom even if there's rules and regulations. Same situation with it. You cannot say that Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency can't be decentralized just because internet is centralized. I disagree with this. You use internet with crypto. Even if others can control the internet, it doesn't mean they can control cryptocurrency since they are still decentralized in nature.

"With enough capital, it's possible to secure Bitcoin in our homes with sophisticated ASIC machines too"

If this is the case then what makes it truly revolutionary? It almost Seem like another pay wall to block people and exercise centralized control no (not intentionally)? I don't think that the internet will ever be completely decentralized, nor will the proof of work consensus algorithm be needed within the future. Proof of work is starting to look more and more like just a working proof of concept for the blockchain, demonstrating the capabilities of the Bitcoin network. it was good at the time and created a whole world wide movement, but I don't think Satoshi meant for it to last forever, why else would the code be open source, if not to be upgraded and re-written?
  instead there should be a middle-ground where decentralization and centralization meet, as not to cancel each other out, but work in harmony. Freedom without order is Anarchy, while order without freedom is Tyranny.

Okay , it might seem a little reasonable but one should understand that internet yes it might make Bitcoins centralized till an extent but that is only 1-3% .
Also at the same time internet needs to be centralized , a decentralized internet won't work , we need someone to handle all the operations , all the work , all the management and all , handle accusations there is just so many , if internet was completely centralized it would have been another thing , internet itself cannot control what internet does

A problem for central internet blockchain. But how to create a similar structure. Everybody gonna put a transmitter on the roof of his house? So we can have a decentralized internet. An interesting development, but not impossible.

I think this is something people should be a little more conscious of.

In places where BTC could be most needed people may wind up with a useless string of characters unless they find a way to leave. Governments seem to be getting bolder with this as well.

Look at Kashmir. There's been an absolute internet blackout since August, not even landlines or cable TV are open. Eritrea is extremely blackout happy too as are a few other countries.

In Africa in particular there is no alternative infrastructure. There might 1 or 2 mobile internet networks. If they get one dirty phone call from the secret police the entire country vanishes from the map.

Well that's probably one of the little flaws or risks. Internet existed long ago before bitcoin arrived. Bitcoin is actually born through internet. For now it really just being part of the system and we cannot deny the fact that we are really under the internet era. They have established it already and there are lots of factors to consider to decentralized internet. But I think there are geniuses who can think of ways to make it happen.

This is the reason why the idea of a network inside a network was done. Some call it "deep" but its just another network, that can run on top of internet without being checked, controlled or blocked. The whole point these networks its to break from these.

Internet topology is actually decentralized, it was made so it could withstand nuclear attacks. You cannot destroy something in particular to stop it, tho the lazy way things have been running lately actually could cause major disruption, to those who weren't ready (ie. already using Tor, etc). Censor resistance is one way to view it, neither State nor private entities should be controlling you.

Something on internet could some better centralization, DNS for starters. While not strictly necessary, few people know the IP number of some basic sites, in case DNS goes haywire. So you could start replacing that by not using the "main" DNS (alternatives do exist). And so on we could go with each of the elements.

If things go really bad, Bitcoin could go "deep", and it still would work running in a network that runs safe on top of the unsafe network. This scenario is already improbable on a worldwide level, its possible in some countries. A more proper description is just running nodes and pools as tor hidden services or their equivalent in similar networks (freenode, etc). But this is a worst case scenario which seems to have already been overcome. Still, there ARE nodes running in there...

Can you use internet without Google? Yes you can. It takes discipline but you can completely get rid of Google from your life. Centralized social networks are even easier, its only the stubborn contacts that won't just use decentralized alternatives.

That's my point. Bitcoin could be decentralized by design, but the infrastructure used for Blockchain communication worldwide is not. The public Internet, is largely controlled by governments and ISPs alike. Of course, we got Tor, i2p and other alternative networks. But these same networks depend on the main Internet in some way (their binaries, source code, and everything lives on the public Internet itself). In the event governments decide to put an end to these alternative networks, they can easily do so by restricting people from downloading these alternative network's binary files. I think that Bitcoin would do better if it was based on some sort of mesh network, or personal area network (like Bluetooth). I even heard the possibility of sending Bitcoin through radio waves.

A better term for Bitcoin is "distributed" than "decentralized" because the way it works with the current Internet infrastructure. Until the Internet becomes owned by the people (not ISPs or governments), there will always exist that single point of failure which could put the entire Bitcoin network at risk. I hope that I'm wrong and Bitcoin would turn out to become decentralized over time. Otherwise, we'll be able to experience a decay in Bitcoin's decentralization as big companies (Blockstream & ISP companies), businesses (Binance & Coinbase), and big miners (Bitmain) take the lead in the cryptocurrency's direction within the mainstream world.

Nonetheless, it seems to me that "ZeroNet" will finally be able to serve as a "decentralized gateway" to the Bitcoin blockchain. But being relatively new, it's not as popular as other networks such as Tor and i2p. This, combined with locally-owned networks everyday people could make Bitcoin truly censorship resistant as we know it. Just my thoughts

Let's think about how to decentralize the Internet.In any case, the Internet will not disappear, and the fact that I am engaged in bitcoin mining is unlikely to know my provider.It is not physically possible to build a decentralized Internet.And does it even make sense?Perhaps not exactly this but clearly improving the Internet is engaged in this company :https://noia.network

This is not the decentralization dude, let me explain.


Nope, it's a myth, you can't do whatever you want with a domain name (whatever country you live in) You have to obey to your domain registrar and ICANN. It's already 2 middlemen to obey and you didn't even start to host your website. Then you have to obey the web hosting AUP, and so on...

Firefox, Reddit and Bitcointalk are centralized.
Because Firefox advertises to respect privacy, which is debatable at some points, it doesn't mean the product is decentralized. Platforms like Reddit and Bitcointalk are far to be decentralized. It's not because the rules claim you can say whatever you want, which is debatable at some point again, that you're on a decentralized platform. The same goes for 4Chan, it's not because you can post anonymously that it's decentralized

I agree with you. Nobody forbids being anonymous on the Internet using a variety of tools. It's just that people allow to restrict them and observe their browsing activity, and then they shout that the Internet is centralized

I just want to correct one information here, we cannot store data on the internet, internet is the network that connects computers around the wotld, data is then stored to hard drives and data servers offered by different companies. Internet is just merely the platform for connection and it is considered decentralized as no one is owning the internet where cryptocurrency is working. Thus nodes and storages are also stored in different storage in different data servers.

I think there is only a misinterpretation regarding with internet. First, let us first define what is internet? In my own understanding, it is a place where data stored and shared by millions of computers and gadgets all over the world. How come it will be centralized if people can modify or change something in internet. Maybe, there is some manipulation in other social media networks but there is always so called decentralization. Therefore, bitcoin can have it also since it is connected in internet.

I think that there are degrees to decentralization that people simply don't realise.

There is no absolute decentralized entity or cryptocurrency. All there is is a spectrum from being entirely centralized money supply to a more distributed, equitable system. Bitcoin is one of the most decentralized currencies in that regard that you can access at this current moment.

As you say, some infrastructure is bound to be centralized one way or another. There is no way around that.

The more you think about it, the Internet is just a bunch of websites and IP addresses. And Google/Facebook/powerful governments collectively only control a time amount of websites (the size of those websites doesn't matter here). So these companies are not actually centralizing the internet, they are only centralizing their handful of websites versus 1.5 billion websites in existence.

Or maybe by centralized internet you mean IP addresses which are way more numerous than websites. In this case you might have a cause of concern considering the companies I just mentioned own a huge percentage of IPs. But then again, none of them are participating in the bitcoin blockchain, are they?

I don't agree completely,  but I don't disagree completely neither.

There are some limitations in the internet the way it is, but there is still space for a free web. There are many initiatives like firefox,  bitcoin, bitcointalk,  reddit, 4chan, BitTorrent,  and so many other interesting initiatives

If you want you can just buy a domain and do whatever you want with it.

The internet is more decentralized and more free than the rest of the world and our lives.
Just take a look at the news for example. People are saying whatever they want here in the internet,  but they can't on TV. However,  you have to say what you want in your own platform,  not on someone else's,  like Facebook.