Topic: Is my crypto decentralized? (Read 3406 times)

I have repeated this 4-5 times. I think, as I said above, it is because Bitshares have developed in isolation from crypt  so the idea of "sufficient decentralisation" has gone unchallenged. But they won't contemplate any form of discussion with the wider community to check if the majority agree.


The purpose of this thread is now redundant, if you wish to continue discussion please use one of the existing threads posted above by Stan or start your own.

Thread is locked, I can unlock it to discuss the results of any community consultation on the subject of decentralisation. Feel free to PM.

I think this topic is funny.

Here's an example why:

Let's say community 1 and 2 both have 1000 active stakeholders.

Community 1 has no delegates
Community 2 has 101 delegates

In community 1, everyone can process a block. 60% of all blocks are processed by the same 15 stakeholders. But The total amount of block processors is 200 (example).
In community 2, only the 101 delegates can process blocks. Each block is verified by 101 delegates. But the total amount of block processors is only 101.

Now comes the fun part:

Imagine that community 1 and 2 both reach 1M active stakeholders.

In community 1, number of block processors grows naturally with community size / distribution.
In community 2, number of block processors stays 101.


What people don't get:
In community 2, Multiple stakeholders are delegating their power to one Delegate.
The bigger the community get's, the more centralized it will become.
This is the very opposite of decentralization. I don't get how people don't see this.

Thank you, I think you have been listening. With all crypto still in bootstrapping, it is the future picture that counts.

None of these are more than 7 days old, one of them a day old. I am getting the feeling there has been no external discussion of BTS. Which makes sense, it explains how your claim to decentralisation has gone unchallenged for so long. 

http://bytemaster.bitshares.org/article/2015/01/13/Decentralization-of-Nxt-vs-BitShares/


I wish NXT luck with their model and I hope it scales well in the future but NXT doesn't seem currently very decentralized imo.

COMMUNISM is the perfect word to describe Bitshares.  Communism is a centralized, hierarchical form of governance where wealth is transfered by force from the unprivileged to the privileged.  It is the substitution of competing private enterprises with one state controlled private enterprise.  It is creation of a system which combines political and capital bureaucracy into one all-powerful bureaucracy.  These two forces (political and capital) which should be opposed to each other are consolidated into one creating a "new master class" (101 delegates).  This "new master class" is in fact a state capitalist monopoly which centralizes its rule over the people under the auspices of "economy" and "efficiency" for the "betterment of the society."


A Communist government.  A government controlled and dominated by the privileged elite.  I don't want to participate in such a scheme.


You said "No outsider".  That is a false statement.  There are 1 Billion NXT.  1 Billion divided by 101 equals 9.9 million.  People with less than 9.9 million NXT have forged a block.  If you have 1 million NXT, you forge 2.08 blocks a day.  There is a high chance an individual with less than 9.9 million NXT would add a block that would help confirm transactions.


What you are advocating is the redistribution of forging power.  Where you and I differ is that you believe it is necessary for the State (101 delegates) to intervene and redistribute forging power to themselves and I believe forging power should be left in the hands of its rightful owners and the free market should determine its allocation.  If an individual forges one block a day, does that qualify as worthy?  If he forges one block a week, does that also qualify as adding decentralization to the chain?  You have gone down an extremely slippery slope in disenfranchising forgers based on your opinion of their "contribution" to the decentralization of the system under the auspices of "economy" and "efficiency".  IMO, a forger who contributes one block a day to the chain adds in its decentralization.  Personally, I believe a forger who forges one block a week adds a sizable quantity of decentralization.  In NXT to forge one block a day, you need 500,000 NXT.  500,000 * 101 = 50,500,000 NXT.  There is over eight times as much NXT forging.  I believe that constitutes as more than "101 pools of coins" securing the network.


I would like to say this.  Some people probably think that I'm opposed to Bitshares because I'm a NXT supporter.  This is not true.  I am though strongly opposed to the taking advantage of people who are uninformed and who are not economically privileged.  This is IMO what Bitshares' DPoS algorithm does.  People purchase Bitshares believing that it's decentralized, their vote actually matters, and their money will be protected.  The truth of the matter is none of this is actually true.  It is controlled by 101 individuals (maybe? who really knows).  The wealthiest stakeholders dominate voting to such a degree it creates a blockchain plutocracy.  Their money is taxed via inflation to support the largest stakeholders.  Some people will claim the delegates won't be the wealthiest stakeholders.  I say, "Don't be naive."  They have the means to escape the blockchain taxation by occupying delegate positions which control more stake than they own.  The Bitshares' devs actually encourage individuals to occupy multiple delegate positions.  I have no doubt that this will occur and what is being proposed as a blockchain "meritocracy" is really a blockchain plutocracy which will result in the disenfranchisement of the smaller stakeholders to the benefit of the ruling elite.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2rru9h/how_to_measure_the_decentralization_of_bitcoin/
http://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/2rz0ol/bitasset_yield_now_shown_at_bitsharesblocks/
http://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/2rpear/nothing_at_stake_nothing_to_fear/

I will leave it with you. Hopefully, you'll find the bitcointalk working overs of dans previous blogposts. Or I'll come back to walls of text containing a series of ill fitting analogies   I'd prefer the former but I know you won't let me down stan  

No.

Members of the BTS community saw fit that exactly that was prevented. There are no bitcoiners here. That is why I made the suggestion.

Yes, I'm digging up the links to those too.
The bitsharestalk.org threads were just already all on one page and easy to grab.
(And are open to the public too - just a click away.)

I thought that's exactly what this thread (and the two before it) have been.  No?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=916696.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=913075.0;all

Over 5000 views between all three.  Not bad, given the nature of their OPs. 

This is a free ticket on bitsharestalk. You led me to believe a wider audience on reddit and bitcointalk had scrutinised Dans claims. Particularly of his blog posts.

My pleasure:  bitsharestalk.org/index.php?board=83

Bump.

Just a discussion thread then, to allow everyone to make their points and be heard. It is bitcoiners you are trying to get the opinion of, champions of the first decentralised blockchain. At least I was, before the sabotage.

Polls are overrated.  They can be easily be manipulated by issuing a tribal battle cry and at best they only represent the very groupthink we always try to escape.

As General Patton once said in his famous speech to the 3rd Army:


Of course, we intend to make our advances in a much more polite and erudite way...  

Can you post any examples of these working overs?

That said, there are still plenty of ways to comment if you like.  Every new article is posted as a link on BitSharesTalk.org and the community gives it a good debate.  Come participate there - it's just a link away.

What's more, most of the articles wind up getting posted on reddit or bitcointalk by somebody, and then they really get a workover!

It is strange how Vitalik is able to have comments on his blog, arguably the most widely read in crypto, without issue.

If this thread is to remain useful,  I think it is in your interests to repeat the initial purpose of this thread. You can do it on your own terms with as much obfuscation as Stan can muster. It is a challenge, if you think 'smart decentralisation' is a flyer, then it should be no issue for you.