I was wondering that making a person CEO or something to organise and handle bitcoins is good or the current decentralised nature ?
In a way, the decentralization of bitcoins offers a positive and albeit a negative point, Lets take a look at a scenario where huge sums of bitcoins or when criminals such as terrorists uses bitcoins as a means to cause mayhem, because its decentralized, there is no way that these criminals can be put to justice, Is privacy and anonymity really more important than human lives. 
Topic: is decentralised nature of bitcoins really good ? (Read 649 times)
I was wondering that making a person CEO or something to organise and handle bitcoins is good or the current decentralised nature ?
Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are only valuable because they are so decentralized, and no one can get robbed of their coins forcefully. There were some payment systems in the past, like e-gold and Liberty reserve, and they have failed because they were centralized and it was very easy for the government to take them down. Decentralization comes with the price of increased security costs (mining), and lower scalability, as well as requirement for consensus between all users, but this is the only way to ensure our financial freedom from governments and banks.
I was wondering that making a person CEO or something to organise and handle bitcoins is good or the current decentralised nature ?
Well, BTC isnt quite as decentralized as it used to be. the corporate nature of the mining now, the politics of the Foundation, and the concentration of massive amounts of BTC into singular entities (think exchanges) has done a lot to undermine it. The inherent decentralization built into Bitcoin is honestly what defines it.
The trust arises from the fact that its hard to subvert the blockchain. Consensus is key here, and the distributed, crowd confirmed nature of the ledger requires a ton of resources to alter tat consensus. The centralization of mining makes it a bit easier to subvert this consensus, as powerful actors colluding might actually be a decent percent of the total hashrate. Take the case with BCC; it seemed like miners simply refused to solve blocks for a while, making transactions pend for a freaking eternity.
Why would you need a person in charge? In such case somebody you don't control could decide your future ( the future of your money). What if someone manages to control that CEO? There are many ways starting with a simple blackmail and ending with a gun to his child's head.
People have many flaws, but a collective can see these flaws and don't allow them to have a huge impact, so I would really prefer it to stay decentralized.
People have many flaws, but a collective can see these flaws and don't allow them to have a huge impact, so I would really prefer it to stay decentralized.
I was wondering that making a person CEO or something to organise and handle bitcoins is good or the current decentralised nature ?
If there is what we call CEO then everything we are experiencing good right now would not happen. If you still don't get the idea of the bitcoin industry then ill just have to leave this to you. Individuals that can be the ceo of their own funds are much stronger than following the lead of one.
Decentralized control of bitcoin is the basic principle of its existence. This principle is good in the sense that centralized management always includes the threat of using self-will and excessive bureaucracy.
The entire point of Bitcoin is decentralization. Satoshi Nakomoto created it so that anyone could control their own money without any need for a middleman such as the banks or other financial institutions which only seek to hold your money so they can invest it themselves while paying you next-to-nothing and collecting monthly and other fees off of you also. With Bitcoin there are low fees and you are your own bank so you do not need this middle man or centralization, but rather everyone has more freedom and privacy with Bitcoin.
Bitcoin is created by satoshi as a decentralized currency.Some times,before bitcoin seemed to be like a little bit centralized in mining since china had the most mining farms.So they were even able to manipulate bitcoin price to some extent by dumping their bitcoins.But now after actions taken by PBOC,bitcoin is no more dominated by chinese gamblers.It is the decentralized nature of bitcoin due to which it has remained uncontrolled by any governments or bankers.Only due to this decentralized nature,bitcoin's value could not be devalued by any one just like indian government did by demonitizing high value notes.Thats why bitcoin has gained trust among investors world wide.
I was wondering that making a person CEO or something to organise and handle bitcoins is good or the current decentralised nature ?
Centralized currency means that the government is printing more and MORE money ever year and then ton MORE money when they feel the economy needs to be stimulated devaluing the money you have which means inflation is always making your savings smaller unless you take risk and put it in investments like the stock market, real estate, etc where you can lose money.
Bitcoin has a lot of risk too and high volatility but at least it DOESN'T HAVE GUARANTEED INFLATION like say the US Dollar where you lose 2-3% of your money every year or India where from 2008-20013 you lose around 9% every year or Venezuela where inflation last time I read was like 150% this year.
They say the magic of compounding interest but that compounding inflation will kill you. And in our lifetimes, we will see lots of countries that have hyperinflation. The less your trust the competency of your government, the less risky Bitcoin appears -- at least to hedge a small portion of your savings to it.
Yea of course, the deccentralised nature is part of the reason why people use Bitcoin. By taking it away, you would have to rely on a centralized form of holding bitcoin, and that requires putting all your btc into ONE person's hands. It would be no different than a normal currency where you have to pay taxes and such.
I was wondering that making a person CEO or something to organise and handle bitcoins is good or the current decentralised nature ?
This is contradicting and the term decentalization isnt fit on the question itself. When we do speak about decentralized it cant really be controlled or manipulate. There are no organizations,CEO, government would able to handle such thing. If you do have your bitcoin you are the only one who do have control on it and no people can able to touch that or get it from you as long you do secure its private keys and this is the main thing why lots of bitcoin users caught their attention.
Bitcoin, like the other cryptovita, is decentralized in nature. If this is changed by including the elements of centralization, the essence of the crypto currency will change and the main positive points will disappear. It will not be the same crypto currency as it was conceived. Therefore, the basic principles of the functioning of the crypto-currency, such as decentralization, must be preserved and protected.
I was wondering that making a person CEO or something to organise and handle bitcoins is good or the current decentralised nature ?
Centralization is good when it is executed with benevolence. However what usually happens is that the people that are "in charge" have their own interests which are different than the general public. Assuming that you don't have selfless benevolent leadership, decentralization is a better approach imo.
I was wondering that making a person CEO or something to organise and handle bitcoins is good or the current decentralised nature ?
It is the decentralised nature of Bitcoin which differentiate it from regular fiat currency. If some institution start regulating it. They would definitely try to regulate the price as well which is not Bitcoin was meant for. People wanted freedom from centralised form of monetary system and here comes the Bitcoin giving freedom to people of managing their own money. Yes. Decentralization means freedom. Bitcoin enjoys the total freedom it gets. More and more people has learned to appreciate its full benefits too.
Take this as an example. The Initial Coin Offering (ICO) encourages the use of a cryptocurrency. Everex - have you heard it? If not, full details here: goo.gl/E2NDF2 - makes use of both bitcoin and ethereum. Both are popular cryptocurrency. Both are decentralized. Therefore, their start-up transactions run smoothly. It's secured and fast considering the use of a smart contract.
Take this as an example. The Initial Coin Offering (ICO) encourages the use of a cryptocurrency. Everex - have you heard it? If not, full details here: goo.gl/E2NDF2 - makes use of both bitcoin and ethereum. Both are popular cryptocurrency. Both are decentralized. Therefore, their start-up transactions run smoothly. It's secured and fast considering the use of a smart contract.
Decentralization being the basis of Bitcoin is extremely important, however I think in the future will be many "banks" where one can store the coins to keep them safe, just like banks hold cash now.
Anyone could keep cash in their house, right? Why do we need banks? I think cryptocurrencies will be similar. People will keep them in banks and take them out when they need.
I was wondering that making a person CEO or something to organise and handle bitcoins is good or the current decentralised nature ?
This is contradicting and the term decentalization isnt fit on the question itself. When we do speak about decentralized it cant really be controlled or manipulate. There are no organizations,CEO, government would able to handle such thing. If you do have your bitcoin you are the only one who do have control on it and no people can able to touch that or get it from you as long you do secure its private keys and this is the main thing why lots of bitcoin users caught their attention. 
Yes. Decentralization means freedom. Bitcoin enjoys the total freedom it gets. More and more people has learned to appreciate its full benefits too.
Take this as an example. The Initial Coin Offering (ICO) encourages the use of a cryptocurrency. Everex - have you heard it? If not, full details here: goo.gl/E2NDF2 - makes use of both bitcoin and ethereum. Both are popular cryptocurrency. Both are decentralized. Therefore, their start-up transactions run smoothly. It's secured and fast considering the use of a smart contract.
Take this as an example. The Initial Coin Offering (ICO) encourages the use of a cryptocurrency. Everex - have you heard it? If not, full details here: goo.gl/E2NDF2 - makes use of both bitcoin and ethereum. Both are popular cryptocurrency. Both are decentralized. Therefore, their start-up transactions run smoothly. It's secured and fast considering the use of a smart contract.
I was wondering that making a person CEO or something to organise and handle bitcoins is good or the current decentralised nature ?
Hek no, who would want these corrupt people. Some of us are in this space purely because of it is decentralized. We dont want governments, banks and ceo running this space. This is a currency for the people by the people. You obviously never read the Bitcoin white paper. Please go read it and understand what Bitcoin is about. And why its is important to society going forward.
I was wondering that making a person CEO or something to organise and handle bitcoins is good or the current decentralised nature ?
The first part of your question is a bit stupid, illogical. You will find shades of centralization in bitcoin in different fields, but still the protocol isn't controlled by a single entity, take that away the whole purpose of bitcoin is gone, then no difference between fiat/dollar and bitcoin, just another currency backed by a flawed monetary system and controlled by centralized authorities, governments, banks. In simple words, decentralization is what makes bitcoin unique, inherent nature, take it away bitcoin is dead.
I was wondering that making a person CEO or something to organise and handle bitcoins is good or the current decentralised nature ?
Jump to: