In nature cryptocurrencies are decentralized, however with government intervention and KYC its becoming centralized. In a dangerous price manner of cryptocurrency its good for investors to have protection specially the small ones, without governing bodies we can't sue anyone who is violating others. But I believe that power and control over should only be vested to individuals or holders.
So in the end,we still prefer to have a decentralized system rather than a system controlled by the government.I think we should not lost the nature of crypto having a decentralized system because first and foremost,it's what keeps the people from entering into a crypto world where you have the full control of your money and no tax is being collected. 
Topic: Centralized or Decentralized for cryptocurrencies? - page 5. (Read 2313 times)
We all know, there are 2 types of cryptocurrency
1st: centralized
2nd: decentralized
The difference between them, centralized cryptocurrency is controlled by a government or a company. It has value only in the specific area under company or government boundaries.
Decentralized cryptocurrency has no connection with any state, government
But, the government of some countries are against Bitcoin and some are ready to adopt Bitcoin. So what would effect on Bitcoin if any government approved Bitcoin as a legal tender?
1st: centralized
2nd: decentralized
The difference between them, centralized cryptocurrency is controlled by a government or a company. It has value only in the specific area under company or government boundaries.
Decentralized cryptocurrency has no connection with any state, government
But, the government of some countries are against Bitcoin and some are ready to adopt Bitcoin. So what would effect on Bitcoin if any government approved Bitcoin as a legal tender?
For they are not against (based on what I know) they may not see bitcoin as an essential to there country. We should have atleast understand them.
Also can anyone give an information about a government, besides China that do not like to adapt bitcoin/ the cryptocurrency.
If some government that I do not know of do this banning/ non-adaptation to bitcoin. I would say it is becuase that they do not see a great future behind cryptocurrency or they can not see a good way to take advantage of our cryptocurrency.
Also no offense to the government, we do see some government that are getting monies behind our back.
Some Governments are biased, and if they get hold of the control of Bitcoin, no one could predict what could happen. Moreover, the essence of Crypto-currency is not to place the control in the hands of some people. Crypto-currency is a default trust system, and when people gets to control it. Biasness could crept in, not to talk of when Government gets in charge.
Although, there are good sides to it.
I agree with this, while some people complain about the whales having a big influence in the market at the same time they have gained the right to that influence by having so many bitcoins that they earn by being smart and invest at the right time unlike so many other people, but in a centralized system those very same whales will be a lot more powerful since they will be able to bribe those at the top and play by different rules than the ones that we play.Although, there are good sides to it.
Under a decentralized system whales still have a lot of advantage since they are very powerful but they still need to play by the same rules that we play, that means that if they make too many mistakes they will stop being whales and they will not have as many influence in the market as they have now.
In nature cryptocurrencies are decentralized, however with government intervention and KYC its becoming centralized. In a dangerous price manner of cryptocurrency its good for investors to have protection specially the small ones, without governing bodies we can't sue anyone who is violating others. But I believe that power and control over should only be vested to individuals or holders.
It depends on people, because not everyone understands why we need decentralization. Most of people just don't care about their area of freedom and for them its ok to send passport, photo etc. And ofc government won't allow something decentralized.
Too much or too few has no good effect on everything. If i would have to choose, i want to have a half decentralize half centralize or a pre regulated system just right to monitor scam ICOs or even scammers or alt accounts. System with no regulation is good, but free people are sometimes scary.
In nature cryptocurrencies are decentralized, however with government intervention and KYC its becoming centralized. In a dangerous price manner of cryptocurrency its good for investors to have protection specially the small ones, without governing bodies we can't sue anyone who is violating others. But I believe that power and control over should only be vested to individuals or holders.
We all know, there are 2 types of cryptocurrency
1st: centralized
2nd: decentralized
The difference between them, centralized cryptocurrency is controlled by a government or a company. It has value only in the specific area under company or government boundaries.
Decentralized cryptocurrency has no connection with any state, government
But, the government of some countries are against Bitcoin and some are ready to adopt Bitcoin. So what would effect on Bitcoin if any government approved Bitcoin as a legal tender?
if bitcoin approved to be a legal tender, there will be good because an open ledger called a block chain on which all transactions are recorded and monitored. Because of this, once a transaction is completed and recorded on the ledger, it cannot be changed. Transactions are available for verification by anyone and anytime. 1st: centralized
2nd: decentralized
The difference between them, centralized cryptocurrency is controlled by a government or a company. It has value only in the specific area under company or government boundaries.
Decentralized cryptocurrency has no connection with any state, government
But, the government of some countries are against Bitcoin and some are ready to adopt Bitcoin. So what would effect on Bitcoin if any government approved Bitcoin as a legal tender?
I don't mind centralized currencies in crypto as long as I know what they are doing and they are transparent on their moves. For example ripple has been one of the biggest crypto currencies out there for a long time and no matter what you say about them they have been going strong for years now working with banks and other corporations.
If a centraziled crypto coin has to do something with us than I would rather it be like ripple. If not than of course we know how horrible it can get so I rather use something decentralized and keep going on my way like I did for the fiat currency that has been not so valuable anymore.
If a centraziled crypto coin has to do something with us than I would rather it be like ripple. If not than of course we know how horrible it can get so I rather use something decentralized and keep going on my way like I did for the fiat currency that has been not so valuable anymore.
Having legal tender is different thing and regulating the bitcoin completely would be completely different thing. Know the difference that tender is just set of rules which gives few limitations, timely use etc and thus does not bind with full set of rules. While if one says regulating it then there would be far stricter approaches towards the bitcoin and thus it could be disastrous for the crypto economy as it will take out all the freedom of the bitcoin which it is getting from the current decentralised environment. So believe me one has to keep the bitcoin in decentralised mode rather than centralise.
I think Decentralization is a good thing in the cryptocurrency world. It changes anything that is usually controlled by a centralized authority who is arrogant into a slippery eel that is hard to turn off. No one will revoke your list simply because some snowflakes are offended or close your account just because you received a very large payment.
I agree.Having a decentralized system for cryptocurrencies will give us more freedom to manage our own money and be responsible for its safe keeping rather than having banks that are centralized which will give us limitations that will minimize our full authority towards our own money. But, the government of some countries are against Bitcoin and some are ready to adopt Bitcoin. So what would effect on Bitcoin if any government approved Bitcoin as a legal tender?
I think when a country adopts Bitcoin it's always positive for the currency as the demand will increase and its price will increase as well (at least on short term). But it may not be positive for the people of that respective country which adopted Bitcoin officially, by the government's endorsement. The reason is that when a government endorses Bitcoin, they are trying to stay behind it, centralizing the currency on the local sphere, inside the country's borders.
And with centralization there are extra costs for the user, what can make the usage of Bitcoin more expensive and uninteresting for many people... And when it's uninteresting the demand drops, and the impact becomes negative even for the currency in general (on long term).
I think Decentralization is a good thing in the cryptocurrency world. It changes anything that is usually controlled by a centralized authority who is arrogant into a slippery eel that is hard to turn off. No one will revoke your list simply because some snowflakes are offended or close your account just because you received a very large payment.
centralized cryptocurrency is Ripple and Decentralised cryptocurrency is Bitcoin both these crypto currency use blockchain as intermediary technology but their specifications are different
We are not comparing ripple and bitcoin. Of course they are based on blockchain, everyone knows that. We are discussing about what would effect on Bitcoin if any government approved Bitcoin as a legal tender?
The different thing between crytocurrency and fiat is decentralized. If coin controlled by government and used for payment, i think its like digital money and not cryptocurrency. Cryptocurrency should be decentralized because government should not control the supply
Decentralization is the thing to save us from this shit corrupted world. I wanna know whether this is good project or not and decentralization is the matter on every ICO projects or even I like to avoid the worst coin Ripple since it is from the centralized platform.
So far the people takes wrong assumption on regulations and government's move around the world to find the great kicks. Still the bitcoin and altcoins are bumping up in the market.
Sure with corrupted world, but how crypto (not only BTC) will overtake fiat? We all use fiat irl, if governments choose cryptocurrency instead of fiat, it will give unreal pump to all currencies (not only Bitcoin). But you understand, governments need to control everything and they won't pick decentralized cryptocurrencies.
centralized cryptocurrency is Ripple and Decentralised cryptocurrency is Bitcoin both these crypto currency use blockchain as intermediary technology but their specifications are different
The different thing between crytocurrency and fiat is decentralized. If coin controlled by government and used for payment, i think its like digital money and not cryptocurrency. Cryptocurrency should be decentralized because government should not control the supply
Decentralization is the thing to save us from this shit corrupted world. I wanna know whether this is good project or not and decentralization is the matter on every ICO projects or even I like to avoid the worst coin Ripple since it is from the centralized platform.
So far the people takes wrong assumption on regulations and government's move around the world to find the great kicks. Still the bitcoin and altcoins are bumping up in the market.
Why we talk about blockchain if its still need to be centralized and third parties intervention?
We all know, there are 2 types of cryptocurrency
1st: centralized
2nd: decentralized
The difference between them, centralized cryptocurrency is controlled by a government or a company. It has value only in the specific area under company or government boundaries.
Decentralized cryptocurrency has no connection with any state, government
But, the government of some countries are against Bitcoin and some are ready to adopt Bitcoin. So what would effect on Bitcoin if any government approved Bitcoin as a legal tender?
1st: centralized
2nd: decentralized
The difference between them, centralized cryptocurrency is controlled by a government or a company. It has value only in the specific area under company or government boundaries.
Decentralized cryptocurrency has no connection with any state, government
But, the government of some countries are against Bitcoin and some are ready to adopt Bitcoin. So what would effect on Bitcoin if any government approved Bitcoin as a legal tender?
Obviously, a decentralised cryptocurrency.
I would never use a centralised currency unless I absolutely need to. One of Bitcoin's most innovative and promising characteristics is the ability to transact trustlessly, without a third party involved in any of the processes, including the handling of the supply of currency, or storing funds. And another one of the characteristics that make bitcoin have so much potential over the long run is its limited supply, hard coded into its system, and is enforced on a decentralised level.
With a centralised crypto you're getting none of that. Essentially it's going to be fiat v2.0, just on a blockchain, that's all. It's not a store of value that the decentralised cryptocurrencies are, because it is managed by a central entity, more coins can always be added to circulation, forks can be done, etc. etc.
Whether bitcoin or any other decentralised cryptocurrency is legal tender or not is completely irrelevant. What matters is whether or not the network itself is decentralised.
We all know, there are 2 types of cryptocurrency
1st: centralized
2nd: decentralized
The difference between them, centralized cryptocurrency is controlled by a government or a company. It has value only in the specific area under company or government boundaries.
Decentralized cryptocurrency has no connection with any state, government
But, the government of some countries are against Bitcoin and some are ready to adopt Bitcoin. So what would effect on Bitcoin if any government approved Bitcoin as a legal tender?
1st: centralized
2nd: decentralized
The difference between them, centralized cryptocurrency is controlled by a government or a company. It has value only in the specific area under company or government boundaries.
Decentralized cryptocurrency has no connection with any state, government
But, the government of some countries are against Bitcoin and some are ready to adopt Bitcoin. So what would effect on Bitcoin if any government approved Bitcoin as a legal tender?
Its much better if currency using decentralized system. With decentralized system, no corrupt system on moneter system. If government recognized bitcoin and regulate bitcoin as payment, i think the effect is on bitcoin price will rising
When the government recognizes bitcoin legally it will greatly affect the demand of bitcoin itself, considering that it is very positive news and refers to the increase in bitcoin last year to almost $ 20,000 then the high demand will affect the increase in bitcoin prices.
Jump to: