"Central", yeah just reading that title already is a no-no.
This is just a specific question to those who asks the same question like "Will government regulate Bitcoin?"
Man, I don't want authorities to see how much I am holding in my wallet.
Topic: Can there be some Bitcoin Central Agency in future? (Read 519 times)
Bitcoin Central Agency in future will give us a feeling of security. I think eventually bitcoin will get bigger the more we need some sort of juries to attend to some certain issues. However, that would probably change the crypto processes and regulations. Its quite somehow complicated but more than that security is badly needed. It can possibly compromise the crypto idealism as what it had practiced for so long. Well, only time can tell.
People often tend to say that Bitcoin is a P2P currency based on the trust between two people. However it's obvious that these days scams are on rapid rise while governments are generally not providing any legal security to those who are involved in this. So do you think there can be some central Bitcoin Authority represented by various people who can become jury in such cases of dispute? I think this can also increase adoption as people can trust btc more. Also even countries would feel safer as such an authority can conyrol certain malpractices
No, the problems should never be solved via central authority otherwise abuse will eventually creep in. court-like institution for Bitcoin can be built on decentralized platforms. Qualified people could be chosen randomly from millions of members worldwide to enforce rules without depending on any centralized authority.
It's too risky to solve Bitcoin/cryptocurrency problems via central means
People often tend to say that Bitcoin is a P2P currency based on the trust between two people. However it's obvious that these days scams are on rapid rise while governments are generally not providing any legal security to those who are involved in this. So do you think there can be some central Bitcoin Authority represented by various people who can become jury in such cases of dispute? I think this can also increase adoption as people can trust btc more. Also even countries would feel safer as such an authority can conyrol certain malpractices
What you need to understand is that in a decentralized system or ecosystem, people are simply in charge of their own safety in terms of keeping their funds safe. With financial freedom, authorities can not have right to control all activities done in the financial ecosystem. Having a central agency for the Bitcoin ecosystem contradicts the whole idea of decentralization and the principles at which bitcoin operates. People just need to be vigilant on the kinda projects they invest in to avoid getting scammed...
People often tend to say that Bitcoin is a P2P currency based on the trust between two people. However it's obvious that these days scams are on rapid rise while governments are generally not providing any legal security to those who are involved in this. So do you think there can be some central Bitcoin Authority represented by various people who can become jury in such cases of dispute? I think this can also increase adoption as people can trust btc more. Also even countries would feel safer as such an authority can conyrol certain malpractices
The meaning of Bitcoin in P2P and decentralization. If the central governing body of Bitcoin appears, this will be the end of the coin's existence as the safest asset.
People often tend to say that Bitcoin is a P2P currency based on the trust between two people. However it's obvious that these days scams are on rapid rise while governments are generally not providing any legal security to those who are involved in this. So do you think there can be some central Bitcoin Authority represented by various people who can become jury in such cases of dispute? I think this can also increase adoption as people can trust btc more. Also even countries would feel safer as such an authority can conyrol certain malpractices
Bitcoin is decentralized but if we look at the situation today brokers and exchangers are now being required by the government to comply with the KYC regulations. Possibly in the future there will be some agency that will look into the activities pertaining bitcoin. As the government around the world unite to create the UN they will also unite to create an interagency focusing on cryptocurrency. An agency that will secure that cryptocurrency is not being used illegally and to make sure that there will be no price manipulation. We cannot but to follow the rules of the government even if we go against it we just have no power.
That's likely going to happen in the future as bitcoin and crypto will be fully legalize by most countries.
We are using bitcoin to preserve our privacy but that is not the case when its been regulated as the government will ensure they have total control through their regulation on trading outlets and could be both local and international, of course it will not help when each country has unique rules of crypto, we will surely see some standard law that will be use by most countries to regulate crypto.
We are using bitcoin to preserve our privacy but that is not the case when its been regulated as the government will ensure they have total control through their regulation on trading outlets and could be both local and international, of course it will not help when each country has unique rules of crypto, we will surely see some standard law that will be use by most countries to regulate crypto.
People often tend to say that Bitcoin is a P2P currency based on the trust between two people. However it's obvious that these days scams are on rapid rise while governments are generally not providing any legal security to those who are involved in this. So do you think there can be some central Bitcoin Authority represented by various people who can become jury in such cases of dispute? I think this can also increase adoption as people can trust btc more. Also even countries would feel safer as such an authority can conyrol certain malpractices
It will just destroy Bitcoin's purpose aside from this such excess fee will exist like taxes and others because it is to maintain the man or whatever the mean in between two people who are exchanging. Fluctuations I guess wouldn't happened anymore. Rules and regulations are to exist. Although the money is secured and in on monitor but I think it is not fun to engage in crypto currency anymore besides why would someone engage into that if fiats can provide such features.
The way to avoid scams is by using your brain, not placing trust in central authorities.
But if you want to persist with such a terrible idea and pay some people to do this job, go right ahead. Or did you think they're going to do it for free? Or that someone else was going to pay for it? Think it through, please.
But if you want to persist with such a terrible idea and pay some people to do this job, go right ahead. Or did you think they're going to do it for free? Or that someone else was going to pay for it? Think it through, please.
But bitcoin is decentralized. No one is controlling it. Having central agency means someone higher is controlling or regulating the users. I know the aim of this is for security since scams are rampant but it will obviously go against its nature.
Bitcoin is decentralized that's why we are responsible for every transactions we made. It's our own fault responsibilities if we lost our money. Even thoigh we put up an agency, it will still be hard to find your bitcoin back.
Bitcoin is decentralized that's why we are responsible for every transactions we made. It's our own fault responsibilities if we lost our money. Even thoigh we put up an agency, it will still be hard to find your bitcoin back.
Exactly! If we have any sort of agency managing bitcoin to ensure security then it will no ;longer be known as decentralized and this idea might just kill bitcoin and other cryptos, we are better as of now without any sort of third party involvement and I am sure people are aware about escrow services to avoid getting scammed and if people do take risk to save those small amount of escrow charges and gets scammed then it's their mistake. We should never think of having any sort of regulators in bitcoin.
Scams are everywhere let it be crypto, real world trades, banks and all it's upto people to be cautious.
But bitcoin is decentralized. No one is controlling it. Having central agency means someone higher is controlling or regulating the users. I know the aim of this is for security since scams are rampant but it will obviously go against its nature.
Bitcoin is decentralized that's why we are responsible for every transactions we made. It's our own fault responsibilities if we lost our money. Even thoigh we put up an agency, it will still be hard to find your bitcoin back.
Bitcoin is decentralized that's why we are responsible for every transactions we made. It's our own fault responsibilities if we lost our money. Even thoigh we put up an agency, it will still be hard to find your bitcoin back.
that's what point there is escrow service for avoid fraud/scamer and you will not lose lot money because of the fee.
and you say it will make bitcoin end? nope even there more worse news about bitcoin and bitcoin still survive.
people already trust in bitcoin if not,there are no bitcoin and no transaction at all.You just need avoid bad people liek that.
and you say it will make bitcoin end? nope even there more worse news about bitcoin and bitcoin still survive.
people already trust in bitcoin if not,there are no bitcoin and no transaction at all.You just need avoid bad people liek that.
We don't need a central authority in the bitcoin community to stop scammers. I think that's in our hands, you should know who you are dealing with when buying things with bitcoin. You are supposed to be super smart when using bitcoin by knowing the bitcoin transactions are irreversible. You have to trust your business partner first.
Well spoken, its impossible to stop scammers particularly these days that most of them are using different techniques and strategies to deceive others so they can get what they want. If you really wanted to avoid them then you should have enough understanding about safety and security because you can't easily say peoples true intentions, actually you don't have to be smart as long as you are aware of everything then its fine. Being attentive and cautious is helpful because it makes you see every little details and information in that way you can explore things before making decisions since it is undoubtedly speculative.
Bitcoin is the currency for the people, so the people decides what services they need to use to make the experience more convenient and safe for them. Exchanges are a perfect example of that, because they came into existence, when some people wanted to trade in Bitcoin in a more regulated environment.
Yes, Bitcoin is supposed to replace all these centralized services, but there are still some people who wants the safety net of third party services. The community has created several intermediary services, like Escrow services and Payment processors to offer them some additional protection against these scams, but none of these services are guaranteed to be 100% safe.
Bitcoin is all about choices and alternatives and you decide what you want.
Yes, Bitcoin is supposed to replace all these centralized services, but there are still some people who wants the safety net of third party services. The community has created several intermediary services, like Escrow services and Payment processors to offer them some additional protection against these scams, but none of these services are guaranteed to be 100% safe.
Bitcoin is all about choices and alternatives and you decide what you want.
No, not at all.
Bitcoin is an emergent superorganism.
Bitcoin is doing better. and never had:
- CEO
- Marketing
- Salaries
- ICO
- Partnerships
- Headquarters
- Customer support.
For source Check tweet https://twitter.com/abhijit_kale/status/1118374494110912512
So considering above mentioned parameters Bitcoin is different. And it proved it's existence.
Making a challenge to the specification of Bitcoins decreases Bitcoin's privacy, and this is against its specification. Bitcoin is decentralized. And if in future any central agency takes control of Bitcoin then that will end of Bitcoins era. belive it or not.
Bitcoin is an emergent superorganism.
Bitcoin is doing better. and never had:
- CEO
- Marketing
- Salaries
- ICO
- Partnerships
- Headquarters
- Customer support.
For source Check tweet https://twitter.com/abhijit_kale/status/1118374494110912512
So considering above mentioned parameters Bitcoin is different. And it proved it's existence.
Making a challenge to the specification of Bitcoins decreases Bitcoin's privacy, and this is against its specification. Bitcoin is decentralized. And if in future any central agency takes control of Bitcoin then that will end of Bitcoins era. belive it or not.
Bitcoin is backed by blockchain which is very decentralized in all aspects, for it to be partially or fully controlled by another agency would only remove the decentralized backbone of blockchain. Governmental agencies should just do their part to ensure that people don't take advantage of the anonymity bit and scam innocent people.
Cryptocurrency is decentralized so there is no one in control of it. However, having a Bitcoin Central Agency couldn't still resolve problems such as hacking and scamming. It will be better if we users will be the one to adjust and get rid of those crimes. Cryptocurrency could stand and resolve its issues alone.
Why will people need a bitcoin central agency? There can only be a central agency to a particular thing when there is a central body controlling the use of that particular thing and this body is basically in charge of the production of that thing. Bitcoin on the other hand has no specific body in charge of the production and circulation of the number of Bitcoin. So why the hell will the central agency be needed for ?
People often tend to say that Bitcoin is a P2P currency based on the trust between two people. However it's obvious that these days scams are on rapid rise while governments are generally not providing any legal security to those who are involved in this.
If one is aware of what is the cryptocurrency and how it works, there are really small chances that someone can fool him. That scams you're talking about are mainly related to the ponzi/mlm or similar things, unfortunately no one can fight human stupidity and ignorance.
It is not easy to be your own bank, but Bitcoin promoting this idea from the start - moving away from centralized to decentralized currency. Your idea makes no sense unless we change the whole concept and make drastic changes, but then it would no longer be Bitcoin.
I think it would be beneficial if it would be able to regulate and implement policies to existing exchanges and declare international standards for security and such before an enterprise opens up an exchange. This is to prevent thefts, scams, etc.
Having a central agency does not necessarily mean the system would be centralized. The supply/demand and block generation, as well as trades are still decentralized and controlled by the traders. I don't see a problem here. And also, it does not mean it would collect every single address owner and his details. It's just to have someone responsible to exchanges with unsecure platforms.
This is much more beneficial to crypto in general since most of the scams come from altcoins and various crypto-related projects.
(points 1 below is about exchanges/business. not the bitcoins themselves)Having a central agency does not necessarily mean the system would be centralized. The supply/demand and block generation, as well as trades are still decentralized and controlled by the traders. I don't see a problem here. And also, it does not mean it would collect every single address owner and his details. It's just to have someone responsible to exchanges with unsecure platforms.
This is much more beneficial to crypto in general since most of the scams come from altcoins and various crypto-related projects.
1. regulations(facepalm)
reguations give exchanges the ability to make their own policies on how to stay in the law, but then make it only a crime to disobey the law if they dont report it. if they do report it the only penalty is not criminal, but civil (a fine & resignation letter of a scape goat employee).
regulations give businesses a shiny sherriffs badge to police its customers
what should be promoted is not regulations but consumer protections. alot of people think regulations are consumer protections but they are not.
take the 2007 financial crisis. the bank bailouts, the consumers houses forfeited/foreclosed on. banks were regulated but consumers lost out.
banks didnt get slapped wrists(prison time) because they, when the crap hit the fan, reported their mishandling just intime before getting slapped for not reporting it should the crap hit the fan before reporting.
2. having a CENTRAL authority is centralising things.
a solution would be for instance, for those suseptable to scammers or just happily willing to throw large amounts of funds around without thinking that each person nominate 3 members of their family as co-signers of a multisig. thus keeping things somewhat decentralised. then if one person wanted to spend money. the family can check that person is sane or stupid, by asking if the person knows the recipient. thus family get to slap some sense into the person if they are about to make a foolish mistake handing funds to strangers(prevention better than remedy)
take eamples where scammers target old people that thy owe tax, unpaid bills and must immediately go and purchase itunes/google giftcards to pa the scammer. imagine if the granny had to ask families permission. and the granny told the scammer she cant do anything without family consent. the scammer would have just hung up and the family would help the granny come to her senses to not be fooled so easily (with a cup of tea not a slap)
3. no authority has the ability to reverse bitcoin transactions apart from the holder of the bitcoin deciding he is moral enough to hand back his ill gotton gains. to have a system where funds can be taken away by someone thats not the holder. EG an outside party who has no private key access to the funds. is not only bad security. but also ripe for abuse. such as police seizing funds without having the bank customers password/pin number. or seizing rolls of banknotes from a car stoppd at border patrol. because of no crime but just having more than what police deem fit that a person should have in their car. under the illusion that having too much money is suspicious
imagine the situation. no on is allowed more than 1.2btc or they will be investigated and funds frozen for having more than $10k in their possession
Jump to: