If this doesn't wake you up and make you do the RIGHT thing...

Zanab247

full member

Activity: 1358

Merit: 207

Catalog Websites

Quote from: Dunamisx

This as well also tells me that bitcoin network is gaining more power and adoption the more, so that all of us will understand and learn the way we can have our digital asset with us in our custody than when on a centralized exchange, not your keys and it simply implies not your coin, once you're making the right application and use of non custodial means, then i don't see a reason why we should fear for any unnecessary demand with what others are doing, they cant centralized bitcoin, this is for sure.

Nothing will stop people not to adopt BTC again, and they have seen many reasons why they will continue to adopt the most popular coin, that is causing people to be comfortable with their hodling because they know that time of earning will come for them to achieve their purpose.

Those that tested decentralized currency before, will never pay attention to centralized currency too much because they have have been with the centralized currency some years but no good results to show but the little opportunity they used to test the decentralized investment, they have achieved good results so far.

Many people have observed so many things from BTC industry that is making them not to be afraid, whenever they have the opportunity to hodl BTC because they know the kind team that is behind the coin to ensure it continue dominating in the industry.

DooMAD

legendary

Activity: 3948

Merit: 3191

Leave no FUD unchallenged

Centralisation of the protocol is primarily measured in how freely people can transact. What miners choose to do with their block rewards doesn't impact my ability to transact peer-to-peer using Bitcoin. Pools censoring transactions based on government watchlists and sanctions is a far bigger concern for me than pools using the same custodial service.

Quote from: Jawhead999 on April 18, 2024, 09:14:01 AM

Do you also want to say that Bitcoin is already centralized for people who hold their coins in CEX and buy ETFs? those services only hold customers' money, they didn't really own the coins.

That’s the thing people still seem to be getting wrong. Centralised exchanges do have ownership of the BTC they hold. Just like the commercial bank you use for your fiat is the legal owner of any funds you deposit there. None of it really belongs to you. People have been indoctrinated for centuries to believe money in the bank belongs to them. It doesn't. You are granting them ownership of (what was) your money.

However, using centralised exchanges only makes things centralised for the people who surrender their funds to such third parties. For those who control their own keys, Bitcoin is not centralised for them.

ETFs are a separate matter. Customers of those services never had BTC to begin with. They're just trading ownership of fiat for ownership of shares. Despite what they might think, these customers are not Bitcoin users (unless they also happen to hold some actual BTC).

ABCbits

legendary

Activity: 2870

Merit: 7490

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: Jason Brendon on April 22, 2024, 10:14:40 PM

Quote from: ABCbits on April 22, 2024, 04:42:51 AM

I somewhat agree, i doubt centralized Bitcoin pool can handle government pressure forever. For example, https://b10c.me/observations/08-missing-sanctioned-transactions/ state some pool likely to intentionally exclude certain transaction.

I wonder if these transactions have ever been included.

Yes, since not all pool intentionally exclude certain TX/address. For example, TXID 262025e73812fc68b6514ea366abf463147176c7867e5853f117aded58c30e0e which excluded by ViaBTC on block #808660 included on next block which mined by Foundry USA.

martinex

full member

Activity: 392

Merit: 130

PredX - AI-Powered Prediction Market

Quote from: Jason Brendon on April 22, 2024, 10:14:40 PM

Quote from: ABCbits on April 22, 2024, 04:42:51 AM

I somewhat agree, i doubt centralized Bitcoin pool can handle government pressure forever. For example, https://b10c.me/observations/08-missing-sanctioned-transactions/ state some pool likely to intentionally exclude certain transaction.

I wonder if these transactions have ever been included.

Well, I think another important point that you want to make is that Decentralization is Important and should be a common priority especially for the Bitcoin community which should be kept from causing further concern so as not to weaken the core of BTC's basic philosophy that it runs by many people and for many people.

Jason Brendon

member

Activity: 162

Merit: 65

Quote from: ABCbits on April 22, 2024, 04:42:51 AM

I somewhat agree, i doubt centralized Bitcoin pool can handle government pressure forever. For example, https://b10c.me/observations/08-missing-sanctioned-transactions/ state some pool likely to intentionally exclude certain transaction.

I wonder if these transactions have ever been included.

Jason Brendon

member

Activity: 162

Merit: 65

Quote from: stompix on April 22, 2024, 06:22:46 AM

Quote from: Z-tight on April 18, 2024, 10:14:38 AM

These pools are not centralized because they store their block rewards in a custodial service, i know it sounds 'weird' that all 9 of them chose the same custodial service, Cobo, but it is not for this reason that they can be called centralized.

Pools are by definition centralized, it's a domain name, a person or a group running it, they make the decision, they make the calls.
What we have here is by no means decentralization, we have 9 businesses having the same custodian, mining directly to their partner, and if this deal was possible one might have to ask what else is going behind the scenes.

Quote from: BitMaxz on April 18, 2024, 09:06:53 AM

These big mining pools are the only ones that becomes centralized they have 47% of the total hash rate meaning it's still not centralized there are 53% of the total hashrate is still on decentralized pools and other miners can still mine on other pools if they don't want to mine on a centralized mining pool. ViaBTC and foundrydigital are not included on the list so they don't have full control of all pools yet you can also mine on your own and deploy your own pool if you have a mining farm.

You know too well that foundry is a closed pool, you can't just mine there without them approving you as a parent and with minimum hashrate requirements.
So the alternative to those is actually a bit worse ..

This is exactly the point i am trying to make and worries me. Apparently, for those who say it's not or it won't matter, they are either naive or vicious, or maybe both. If bitcoin is no more decentralized which it is becoming, what's the point of it in existence at all?

stompix

legendary

Activity: 2912

Merit: 6403

Blackjack.fun

Quote from: Z-tight on April 18, 2024, 10:14:38 AM

These pools are not centralized because they store their block rewards in a custodial service, i know it sounds 'weird' that all 9 of them chose the same custodial service, Cobo, but it is not for this reason that they can be called centralized.

Pools are by definition centralized, it's a domain name, a person or a group running it, they make the decision, they make the calls.
What we have here is by no means decentralization, we have 9 businesses having the same custodian, mining directly to their partner, and if this deal was possible one might have to ask what else is going behind the scenes.

Quote from: BitMaxz on April 18, 2024, 09:06:53 AM

These big mining pools are the only ones that becomes centralized they have 47% of the total hash rate meaning it's still not centralized there are 53% of the total hashrate is still on decentralized pools and other miners can still mine on other pools if they don't want to mine on a centralized mining pool. ViaBTC and foundrydigital are not included on the list so they don't have full control of all pools yet you can also mine on your own and deploy your own pool if you have a mining farm.

You know too well that foundry is a closed pool, you can't just mine there without them approving you as a parent and with minimum hashrate requirements.
So the alternative to those is actually a bit worse ..

ABCbits

legendary

Activity: 2870

Merit: 7490

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: Jason Brendon on April 22, 2024, 01:26:20 AM

Apparently, people in this community don't want to talk about this HARD truth. They either are very optimistic about things that are going bad terribly quickly or they just don't want to talk about this.

And you haven't mention what right thing we should do yet.

Quote from: Jason Brendon on April 22, 2024, 01:26:20 AM

In my opinion, centralization in mining is now a very pressing issue.

I somewhat agree, i doubt centralized Bitcoin pool can handle government pressure forever. For example, https://b10c.me/observations/08-missing-sanctioned-transactions/ state some pool likely to intentionally exclude certain transaction.

bitcoiner180

newbie

Activity: 24

Merit: 25

If we add the hashrate of the pools mentioned in the first post we now well exceed 50%.

To make that transaction a person or computer needs to have the keys to all those addresses.

Jason Brendon

member

Activity: 162

Merit: 65

Apparently, people in this community don't want to talk about this HARD truth. They either are very optimistic about things that are going bad terribly quickly or they just don't want to talk about this.
In my opinion, centralization in mining is now a very pressing issue.

dkbit98

legendary

Activity: 2212

Merit: 7064

Quote from: Jason Brendon on April 18, 2024, 02:39:13 AM

What does this tell you?

Another thing to add is that Coinbase exchange is now custodian for most Bitcoin ETF's, there are only few exceptions Gemini and Bitgo, and only one is held by self-custody.
Anyone who is saying that there is no centralization in bitcoin ecosystem is just ignoring and closing their eyes when they see stuff like this.

ABCbits

legendary

Activity: 2870

Merit: 7490

Crypto Swap Exchange

OP, what exactly do you mean by do the right thing? Reviving P2Pool (a decentralized mining pool)[1]? Asking miner to mine on different pool? Anyway, it's hard to understand why would those pool decide to use custodian rather than manage it by themselves.

[1] http://p2pool.in/

AVE5

full member

Activity: 350

Merit: 128

It could be of promoting some of those AltCoins as much as enhancing a team gadgets projected against bitcoin which is an almighty Cryptocoins.
That's is a set of competition in the Crypto industry where most coins envies the unbeatable or bitcoin since its day of existence.

Hispo

legendary

Activity: 1162

Merit: 2025

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: hatshepsut93 on April 18, 2024, 06:26:02 PM

I wouldn't even be worried too much if 47% of the hashrate was controlled by one entity, which is not the case here. The whole point of PoW is not that it's impossible to attack it, but that attacking is very expensive and need to be continuously supported. With PoS you pay once for obtaining a large share of supply and then can attack the network for free for the rest of history.

Sure, you got a fair point there in favor of Proof of Work versus Proof of Stake, though, if we keep the approach of an attack on both system realistic, then it would also very expensive for an entity to own most of the stake of a protocol like Ethereum for the sake of ruining the trust on it. Maybe it would be the thing only a big government could afford to do and for the sake of ruining a "decentralized protocol" for political or economical reason. Even so, the protocol can be forked and start from the point before the attack.
It would be the equivalent of buying a lot of shares of a publicly traded company like Amazon or apple and then, using that power to ruin the company on purpose.

I am not saying it is imposible, but it is also very unlikely to happen. Don't you think?

Happy Bunny

newbie

Activity: 12

Merit: 1

I agree they are doing a big business this year, and do not see the issue as a real threat to BTC.

"If this doesn't wake you up and make you do the RIGHT thing..."
I have the habit of making good choices and this didn't "wake me up" any more than I already am, thanks for trying.

hatshepsut93

legendary

Activity: 3024

Merit: 2148

I wouldn't even be worried too much if 47% of the hashrate was controlled by one entity, which is not the case here. The whole point of PoW is not that it's impossible to attack it, but that attacking is very expensive and need to be continuously supported. With PoS you pay once for obtaining a large share of supply and then can attack the network for free for the rest of history.

Z-tight

hero member

Activity: 994

Merit: 1089

Quote from: BitMaxz on April 18, 2024, 09:06:53 AM

These big mining pools are the only ones that becomes centralized they have 47% of the total hash rate meaning it's still not centralized there are 53% of the total hashrate is still on decentralized pools and other miners can still mine on other pools if they don't want to mine on a centralized mining pool.

These pools are not centralized because they store their block rewards in a custodial service, i know it sounds 'weird' that all 9 of them chose the same custodial service, Cobo, but it is not for this reason that they can be called centralized. If a pool starts 'taking orders' from the government on addresses and utxo's that should be blacklisted, i believe that is when you can call that pool centralized.

Jawhead999

legendary

Activity: 1820

Merit: 1207

Nope, the mining pools is still saturated, except in 2013 and before.

Quote from: Jason Brendon on April 18, 2024, 08:42:33 AM

Look. There are centralization in many ways, among which the mining centralization is the worst one. And this is where we are exactly heading. Very sad.

Do you also want to say that Bitcoin is already centralized for people who hold their coins in CEX and buy ETFs? those services only hold customers' money, they didn't really own the coins. Even the those services went bankrupt, they might obliged to refund the money to the customers, just like Mt.Gox and FTX (although the refund is not yet started).

https://explorer.btc.com/btc/insights-pools

Husires

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1288

Quote from: Z-tight on April 18, 2024, 07:58:13 AM

Op, what do you mean by wake up and do the right thing, i know there is a risk of centralization when few pools control most of the hashrate and now their rewards is stored in a custodial service. But i don't see any reason to press the panic button yet, BTC is still decentralized, and the custodial service cannot control the network just because they have a large amount of BTC's. BTC can only be centralized and pro censorship if most pools start blacklisting addresses and censoring utxo's, but i don't think that is likely to happen.

Two of them have already begun to do so, but if these lists are more widely adopted, such as the lists issued by the US Treasury, the matter will not end well.
These pools can create a hard fork depending on which chain is longer, or at least you need an anonymous mining pool to mine a block and include your transaction.

BitMaxz

legendary

Activity: 3374

Merit: 3095

Playbet.io - Crypto Casino and Sportsbook

Quote from: Jason Brendon on April 18, 2024, 08:42:33 AM

Look. There are centralization in many ways, among which the mining centralization is the worst one. And this is where we are exactly heading. Very sad.

These big mining pools are the only ones that becomes centralized they have 47% of the total hash rate meaning it's still not centralized there are 53% of the total hashrate is still on decentralized pools and other miners can still mine on other pools if they don't want to mine on a centralized mining pool. ViaBTC and foundrydigital are not included on the list so they don't have full control of all pools yet you can also mine on your own and deploy your own pool if you have a mining farm.

Topic: If this doesn't wake you up and make you do the RIGHT thing... (Read 364 times)