Topic: Decentralized, but very slow adoption OR centralized, but mass adoption happened (Read 1565 times)

you mean like Adam back(CEO) and Greg maxwell(CTO) of Blockstream. Advocating for 4mb bloat, purely to fit signatures and confidential payment codes. to push people into their gateway of sidechains and offchains, while the community cant even get 2mb of traditional transaction capacity.(yep even segwit cant expand capacity to accommodate such capacity requests).
even if some notable devs did have decentralized morals at one point multiple years ago. they are now under employment contracts and NDA's so they cannot exactly bite the hand that feeds them, and we can no longr think of them as having the same motives of pre-employment as they now have in employment.

yes the spoon fed mantra from core fanboys has lots of hypocrisy, involved.

though i do agree that regulations should exist only for businesses on the outside layers of bitcoin(fiat touching gateways). but that is why im highly against businesses getting too "handsy" and to involved with swaying the direction of bitcoin by paying dev's.

to me this is a no brainer, the entire point of crypto is to be decentralized, even if it gets mass adopted, if its controlled by one entity whats the point?

No your comment is not right!
As long as the network stays decentralized, the possibility for regulation only exists for companies who have built their service on top of Bitcoin and have their residence in those countries where regulations got issued.
No one can hinder me to use an open source, free in the internet downloadable wallet with that I can send as much Bitcoin as I want around the globe without the need of AML/KYC.

And this is the reason why Bitcoin will stay decentralized, no matter how hard some stupid CEOs are yelling to make bigger blocks just to create an artifical gateway which is in their favour.

core concept appeared in 2013, and meandered away from an open platform for anyone to join and turned into a REKT campaign to push people out that didnt follow a single minded direction of a few paid devs.

satoshi disapeared in 2011.

core and satoshi have no ties

So many vote for decentralized but slow adoption. We know the core concept of bitcoin is decentralized, it is the Satoshi Nakamoto's initial idea, so this option is the initiality of bitcoin. Actually slow adoption is better because we can buy chea[er bitcoin for enough time.

though core is trying to centralize bitcoin by being the sole controller of rule changes and treating any other implementations attempt to add new features as "an altcoin"..

lets instead deal with the other point of this topic..
mass adoption..

knowing Euro is mainstream but you cant buy anything in america with it.. even when euro's are used by more people(in europe) vs americas population combined.
knowing the pound is mainstream but only used by 70million people, which is only 1% of the world
knowing Chinese Yuan is used by a billion people (3 times american population)..
knowing that bitcoin has no borders. so there is no point in the idea of a bitcoin 'country'.

what would people rationally describe as a realistic and achievable scenario that would be defined as the point where bitcoin is "mainstream"
the only answer i can see most centralized/price rising/mass adoption now wannabe's will say is some magic number that is a FIAT value(facepalm)  twice or more times higher then the price they bought it at or twice or more times higher then the price bitcoin is now..

afterall.. a couple years ago the fiat loving centralizing mass adoption advocates said that $1000 was the magic number.. now its $2000-$600,000

what metric would anyone use to consider bitcoin mainstream?
population of users? .. if so how would you measure it
merchant acceptance?.. if so how would you measure it
value of bitcoin?

some people thing the mainstream peak is when media talk positively about bitcoin

Mass adoption will be nice, but I am not going to support another centralized network to achieve that goal. You cannot run, before you

learned how to walk. We can keep things decentralized and still learn to run. The internet walked and now it's running.. The price

watchers / speculators will not agree with this slow process, but they are only in this for the short term profits. 

Personally I think we need to find some middle ground. Fighting the system doesn't really make sense because people are the system, you all are the system so it's like fighting yourself. No regulation and user verification equate to more crime, it would be harder to apprehend criminals. Is this something that is acceptable? In return for what? Does decentralization really mean freedom?

I choose the first option.Bitcoin should be independent from governments and bank control

even with slow adoption.

If bitcoin becomes more centralized,this won`t be bitcoin anymore,it will be shitcoin.

and i ask all those thinking the debate is just about what "team" to trust.

will you be ok with a core team release of 2mb.. or be part of the rekt campaign to push that implementation into obscurity due to it not being a blockstream domination plan.

again worded differently though, by being done by the team you love. will you then finally accept it as a option the community should happily download. or reject it due to fear of core losing central control by offering a feature that other implementations already offer, making core on a level playing field with other implementations by allowing the community true freedom of choice without bias..

as always for core fanboys, its never about the code, never about the feature. its all about core controlling the decisions to centralize bitcoin

You are overcompensating things. People choose to run the Core software, this means they like the developer team and how they get things done.
Everyone is free to try to improve the software, but of course it needs to go under revision by experts, as you have been told, if we let every idiot out there push their code into the project it would be a disaster, specially when there are tons of trolls trying to ruin Bitcoin out there.

Better to see bitcoin decentralized and remain anonymous till it survives or forever. Current adoption level is even enough to hold high price for bitcoin and as bitcoin is listed in trading platform many traders are actively buying bitcoin to hold for future. Adoption will surely increase in future, no need of any bank or company buying bitcoin for quick adoption.

i don't agree with the start of your post.
in my opinion making bitcoin legal or in other words regulations doesn't mean bitcoin is becoming centralized. we are all living in a society so we all have to obey the rules even if they are not to our liking like paying taxes but that doesn't make it centralized by any means.


decentralization is one of the best features of bitcoin and if it is lost/removed then a big part of bitcoin is lost. so a decentralized and slow adoption is a lot better.

You're already having the answer because everything is your mentioned is having the advantages and disadvantages... and so all of the answers will be vague for me.... but what about the subject of your question if this is about bitcoin and if that is centralized and that's not different with fiat and what the people is need for making bitcoin in this day?

If you don't know that you're probably wrong here. Bitcoin without decentralization is the same like fiat using Paypal. Bitcoin's value is destroyed in the process.

I also don't understand why you think that mass adoption rules out decentralization. Please explain.

It makes me sad to see an ever increasing number of Bitcoin users pouring into this forum, who are solely focusing on Bitcoin fiat price valuation and mass adoption without caring about Bitcoin's essential property as a decentralized currency. Such people are apparently clueless of why Bitcoin has value at all. In my opinion these people can not be considered true Bitcoiners, they are just fiat scam money speculators. I don't mind if they leave, because they are perverting the original idea behind Bitcoin.

ya.ya.yo!

If it's centralized, there's no benefit over the banks, and it wouldn't matter if it's mass adopted, because they would still rob you blind.

The biggest strength of bitcoin is the fact that it's decentralized. If you take that away, bitcoin is worthless.

I am concerned with mass adoption right now.  I think if that would happen, it may burn it out.  If it is adopted through out the world, then there will be regulations put in place to protect as our government sees fit.  For this, I am sure they will want some sort of fee, which case I think will start to crash the system as we know it.  Just my opinion.

I completly agree with your words.

It's your bizarrely worded descriptions that led me to believe that it's an independent fork. Maybe if you weren't using massively exaggerated rhetoric to report it, there would be no confusion.

It's pretty obvious that whatever the Core team have discussed in relation to increasing the base size is not happening any time soon. You're trying to create a false equivalency: doubling the base block size in 2018 is not the same as doing it 2015, as you foolishly advocated. Give it up, you're more interested in me and what I think than you are in progress in Bitcoin, it seems.

gmaxwell mentioned it (your best bud)
luke himself mentioned it
mining pools mentioned it
adam back (another friend of yours) mentioned it

they all had a few meetups and stuff to discuss it. (many round tables)
so its not secret knowledge. its just you want to fail at pretending you dont know so you can avoid answering, yet over many months you have been very vocal about the details to show you do actually know about it.

so grow some balls..
will you rekt luke when he releases the 2mb code? again remember its CORE CODE, not independent code.

will you defend luke JR and say he is part of core and the code is vetted by the team.. so its acceptable
or will you REKT luke..

im presuming you will REKT luke because you accidentally tarnished core code made by core team member as "independent".. oops you slipped up and revealed your mindset.