Topic: The Gang of Five: The Dirty Centralization Secret of Bitcoin (Read 1321 times)
There are some legitimate arguments for implementing alt coins but what OP is spouting is utter rubbish.
Why misguide ? If Gavin makes a change and nodes do not update accordingly, it'll simply get rejected. That is called concensus.
Can we say the bitcoin is controlled by bigger mining pools, not the ordinary non mining nodes?
Each mining pool is made up of many different mining farms who all have to agree to use any updated software. If they disagree they can start mining at a different pool that uses the old software.
Why misguide ? If Gavin makes a change and nodes do not update accordingly, it'll simply get rejected. That is called concensus.
Can we say the bitcoin is controlled by bigger mining pools, not the ordinary non mining nodes?
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1008
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
the core five control the official git repo but there are other repos and no one is forcing miners to use their code. lots of people review the changes and you can bet that if anything foul were published it would be all over reddit etc in 5 seconds.
It would be reasonable to be concerned about the centralization of mining hashpower with a limited number of mining conglomerates. But it makes no sense to be concerned about bitcoin software/protocol development by a few devs, since it is the miners who accept/reject any changes they may make. In principle anyone (with coding skills) could offer changes to Bitcoin and see them accepted by the mining community.
How many core devs does Litecoin have? Peercoin? Goldcoin?
I'm sorry, but I believe that your proposals are even more centralized than Bitcoin, according to your own criteria.
I'm sorry, but I believe that your proposals are even more centralized than Bitcoin, according to your own criteria.
Why misguide ? If Gavin makes a change and nodes do not update accordingly, it'll simply get rejected. That is called concensus.
You are correct.
The OP agenda is far more dubious then the message.
Why misguide ? If Gavin makes a change and nodes do not update accordingly, it'll simply get rejected. That is called concensus.
This. OP your argument doesn't make sense. We all have control of whether or not we want to implement the change. The core 5 have almost zero power to do something that would hurt the community. If they update the code to allow them to have a million bitcoins each, no one would adopt the new software.
He's just using a narrative that sort of fits current sentiment to shill some altcoin. Watch. and advertise the signature.
Unfortunately those new to crypto currencies may not know that those altcoin's are pegged to the value of bitcoin.
Altcoin's pale in comparison to bitcoin and it's volume leaving them susceptible to market manipulation (pump and dump).
The bitcoin community and infrastructure rival ALL altcoin's combined.
lol the goldcoin guy is looking in great shock 
why he can post that kind of nonsense story 
all altcoins are just piece of shit and no more future in long term, only bitcoin is the future currency with its widely adoption and more big merchant acceptance.
why he can post that kind of nonsense story all altcoins are just piece of shit and no more future in long term, only bitcoin is the future currency with its widely adoption and more big merchant acceptance. 
When the Federal Reserve decides to make adjustments, the Federal Open Market Committee, the group in charge of overseeing the growth of the United States money supply, must reach a consensus of twelve members.
Fully Story: http://altcoinpress.com/2015/05/the-gang-of-five-the-dirty-centralization-secret-of-bitcoin/
Check the source, and what is their motives for saying this?
The twelve members in the committee represent the US Government {Centralized} and the 5 Core developers represent the Bitcoin community and the decentralized protocol they use. ^Spot the difference?^
You have 5 Core developers and loads of other developers having a collective input, into what they suggest must go into the Bitcoin code. It's silly to think that 5 people could change the 100% consensus amongst everyone running nodes and clients.
These people actively communicate on public forums and meetups, with other people and implement changes based on those inputs.
You always have a choice to either use the new code or not to use it. {Nobody force you to do it}
These people actively communicate on public forums and meetups, with other people and implement changes based on those inputs.
You always have a choice to either use the new code or not to use it. {Nobody force you to do it}
^^^ This.
Apart from the above, when an update is out, all changes made to this new version are listed here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bitcoin-core-0101-has-been-released-1039713
the irony ius that even the core developers arent one person only, so if we ever take in consideration what you said there is still no centralization
and they still don't decide by themselves, they usually ask the community first through numerous polls, and anyway their modifications are always needed in any case
it's not like they are doing changes which only meets their needs
and they still don't decide by themselves, they usually ask the community first through numerous polls, and anyway their modifications are always needed in any case
it's not like they are doing changes which only meets their needs
You have 5 Core developers and loads of other developers having a collective input, into what they suggest must go into the Bitcoin code. It's silly to think that 5 people could change the 100% consensus amongst everyone running nodes and clients.
These people actively communicate on public forums and meetups, with other people and implement changes based on those inputs.
You always have a choice to either use the new code or not to use it. {Nobody force you to do it}
These people actively communicate on public forums and meetups, with other people and implement changes based on those inputs.
You always have a choice to either use the new code or not to use it. {Nobody force you to do it}
I think altcoins should gain more popularity so that it can supply what bitcoin is missing
LTC Goldcoin and PPC dont bring anything new that bitcoin doesn't already offer. Bitcoin is fine. Its Coke. all others are RC Cola. alts gotta at least be Pepsi if their going to make any headway.OP's post, and the countless others like it are just the rumblings of users who are bored. The crypto world has been a little boring this last year.
I think altcoins should gain more popularity so that it can supply what bitcoin is missing
I love a good conspiracy theory as much as the next nut, but there has to be some sort of evidence to make it interesting. Could you be more specific about how the five control things, what their goals are, and what you think the consequences will be?
I've made modifications to my Bitcoin client, and the "gang of five" had no say in the matter.
Can I make changes to the US Dollar without the Fed having any say in the matter?
I don't think the word "decentralized" means what you seem to think it means.
Can I make changes to the US Dollar without the Fed having any say in the matter?
I don't think the word "decentralized" means what you seem to think it means.
goes to show "legendary" member means nothing.
Why misguide ? If Gavin makes a change and nodes do not update accordingly, it'll simply get rejected. That is called concensus.
This. OP your argument doesn't make sense. We all have control of whether or not we want to implement the change. The core 5 have almost zero power to do something that would hurt the community. If they update the code to allow them to have a million bitcoins each, no one would adopt the new software.
He's just using a narrative that sort of fits current sentiment to shill some altcoin. Watch.
and of course Goldcoin
Why misguide ? If Gavin makes a change and nodes do not update accordingly, it'll simply get rejected. That is called concensus.
This. OP your argument doesn't make sense. We all have control of whether or not we want to implement the change. The core 5 have almost zero power to do something that would hurt the community. If they update the code to allow them to have a million bitcoins each, no one would adopt the new software.
He's just using a narrative that sort of fits current sentiment to shill some altcoin. Watch.
More specifically Goldcoin. He owns GLDTalk.
Why misguide ? If Gavin makes a change and nodes do not update accordingly, it'll simply get rejected. That is called concensus.
This. OP your argument doesn't make sense. We all have control of whether or not we want to implement the change. The core 5 have almost zero power to do something that would hurt the community. If they update the code to allow them to have a million bitcoins each, no one would adopt the new software.
He's just using a narrative that sort of fits current sentiment to shill some altcoin. Watch.
Jump to: