Topic: It's ok to love the decentralized bitcoin but why hate the centralized one? - page 3. (Read 2792 times)

Thanks for the comment.

Good. You hate the governative currency digital coin. But if the new coin will be like bitcoin (as it is mentioned in the main post; in other words anonymous in the same way and mass) you will like it even if it will be a governative currency?

If you will have your wage in this kind currency you will refuse that money?

Thanks for the comment.

I don't understand well what does it mean your expression: "you will have your freedom to do any thing you want with it". But a part the meaning of the previous sentence why the centralized one if created in the same way (exactly in the same way) cannot have such quality you have in mind?

Your comments mention "troubles will appear". Why will appear if will be create EXACTLY LIKE BITCOIN. So it will be the same technology which will control everything and no one others. The only difference between both will be that bitcoin have no owners while the second will have owner. But this owner have no one power in everything what have to do with the production of this coin.

What about this situation (which is the one supposed at the main post)?

Then what can be happen to the bitcoin if one pool gain more than 50% of hash power? What does it mean for bitcoin? Will be not anymore decentralized? If this is possible bitcoin will be not more reliable as it is actually?

There are a number of centralised altcoin as we speak, we can choose not to use or buy them and most just out right ignore them. Members here are bitcoin users or holders, we have a "stake" in bitcoin and most would not the decentralised aspect changed. I believe members here don't hate a centralised altcoin, they hate to see a centralised bitcoin.

Thanks for the comment.

I agree with you that this might be possible. I have a question for you. Is this situation you mentioned in your comment possible for bitcoin? If the answer can be yes and bitcoin can be manipulated you will not have more faith in it. You have faith in it because you are sure that it CANNOT be manipulated. I am asking for this kind of coin. That CANNOT be manipulated. That's why I write in my main post: "This kind of coin, like bitcoin, is protected from the manipulation (from everyone and everything) from the technology which will produce it. In other words, no one can change its production (amount, time between amounts, its flow in the market). So no one can change these essential things that can make possible its manipulation."

Do you have to make any comments having in mind THIS kind of digital coin? Why this KIND of digital coin must not have the same status as bitcoin?

Thanks for your comment:

First, what is the dangers of centralization? The manipulation? If you think that the being decentralized of bitcoin protect it from the manipulation I don't think so. Is the technology of production the reason of non manipulation of it and not he being decentralized. If you don't agree with this can you write here the peer to peer technology can be manipulated?

Second, can you show me what is non sense in my words in order that even me understand? I don't see any non sense in my words and any explanation in your words about my non sense in my words.

Third, If the country where you live create a digital coin (like bitcoin - the only difference is that is centralized and not decentralized like bitcoin) which have legal status and become national currency in you country (beside or without your actual national fiat money)  and with this coin give your salary to you what do you do? Will refuse your salary?

Four, why I have to choose decentralized or centralized? Why I cannot choose both? The banks can use both those.

because if you love decentralized, you want to support, it, how loving both will help one? yes you can continue to use both if you want

but bitcoin need to grow strong at the moment, and for this to be true, a portion of centralization must be "destroyed", sucked into bitcoin

after all bitocin, is sucking fiat value right now

A centralized digital currency/gov coin is a fucking nightmare
Everything you earn, buy & sell will be controlled and spied on, you will be nothing more than a taxed livestock

Decentralization and centralization are about freedom. If bitcoin is decentralized which means there are no organization or individual can manage it, do anything they want with it, you will have your freedom to do any thing you want with it. However if it is centralized, troubles will appear as organization and companies will try to control how bitcoin work which causes chaos and currency may go to a breakdown. Just imagine that centralization in cryptocurrencies is an attack, when more than 50% the total mining hashes are focused on 1 place, allowing them to alter with the transaction and many many more troubles. That's why pools don't want it to be centralized and 1 pool never crosses that 50% mining hashes of the total network

If it is centralized, then those important things in its production can be changed. The decentralized nature of Bitcoin means that every node will make sure that every block follows the rules and don't change the rules of production. But if it is centralized, then that means that some central authority sets the rules and tells everyone else what the rules are, even if they don't like the rules. With decentralization, if I don't like the rules, I can change them or go with the old ones. With centralization, someones says "these are the rules and that's that" and no one else can change that. So that means that the central authority can change the rules at their own whim and everyone that uses their coin has to follow.

This makes no sense:

" Being a centralized digital coin mean owned and it is normal that everyone believe that being  owned  can be manipulated.  Like the all actual fiat money.

But this reasoning, I think, have no sense in the case of digital coin like bitcoin. This kind of coin, like bitcoin, is protected from the manipulation (from everyone and everything) from the technology which will produce it."

Bitcoin is protected against the dangers of centralization because it's decentralized, so if you centralize it, it stops having said benefits...

You have to choose, decentralized or centralized. No one cares about centralized crypto currencies, because that is what fiat money is in a way. What do you think banks are? Just closed source ledgers that store numbers in a computer. The actual paper money and coins are a small %, the rest is just numbers on computers. So you might as well have it backed by math and have it open, thats why Bitcoin is better money in the digital era. You centralize it and it losses what makes it interesting.

I see in the forum various post which exalt and consider as sacred the decentralization of bitcoin and in the same amount hate the same coin (if created) but which can be centralized. It is interesting to discuss about this. Being a centralized digital coin mean owned and it is normal that everyone believe that being  owned  can be manipulated.  Like the all actual fiat money.

But this reasoning, I think, have no sense in the case of digital coin like bitcoin. This kind of coin, like bitcoin, is protected from the manipulation (from everyone and everything) from the technology which will produce it. In other words, no one can change its production (amount, time between amounts, its flow in the market). So no one can change these essential things that can make possible its manipulation. Then where is the problem of this centralized digital like bitcoin coin?

It is not the case to talk about the manipulation of the market with the existing coins in it by the speculators. Because this can happen even if this coin could be decentralized.

So, the question to discus is:

Why is so sacred the decentralization of bitcoin and why hate the same product if centralized.

And if bitcoin become centralized (if there are possibilities that this can happen in a very remote future ) it will (could, must) be hated in the same way like the second centralized coins as above written?