Topic: There are no decentralized cryptocurrencies - page 2. (Read 390 times)

The truth is that at some point a compromise has to be made, bitcoin is decentralized but the purpose of bitcoin was to forfeit the need for a third party to verify the validity of the transactions when making a transaction online, and when it comes to that point bitcoin succeeded.

Now it is true that bitcoin is built over a centralized network which is the Internet, but even if the Internet could be decentralized as well now we need to consider that the Internet runs above the electric grid, which is a another centralized network, so while the OP is right Satoshi needed to begin somewhere, if he had to wait until everything else became decentralized then we should probably had to wait for bitcoin for decades, and that in the best case scenario.

If we continue to look at things the way that you are looking at them right now, then we might as well give up on everything. Let’s just not go down that road for now, at least with Bitcoin we have been able to achieve that decentralization to an extent. There are even wallets these days that can send Bitcoin without having to make use of the Internet, the transactions are made offline from one person to another.

And even on the blockchain, the transactions you make only shows your address and where the transaction is going to, it doesn’t really show who is behind the transaction, because your identity is not revealed on the platform. So the privacy Has been achieved to an extent.

yes you have just said what i said about mutually agreed communication. but failed to realise that each country has more then one ISP. and each ISP has its own policies.

EG a russian ISP has different policies than a US ISP
russian government cant tell a russian ISP to "take down" a US ISP or the US government access to the internet. if they could, they would.

what you have to realise with each IP access/webpage visit, there is a handshake protocol. where parties agree on the communication method. yes in most cases they all agree on the same language format of data, but thats not centralisation. thats communication. consent/agreement at each interaction.

being centralised is a single point of control/failure. where everything has to go through one single point. and one entity has full control or can collapse it all. but thats not how the internet works

i know you are trying to imagine the internet as a polygomists house. where all the women in the house is married together with one man and where the man of the house then 'owns' all his wives to do as he pleases by his naive thought that being married means control.

but thats not how marriage works.
just because they speak the same language and have a mutual agreement. does not mean the man can rape his wife anytime he wants. he needs their consent with each interaction/event. women have a mind of their own, their own independance and their own choice to just say no. or more often "not tonight i have a headache".

just because there is a russian polygomist in one house on a street does not mean he controls the whole street of woman. yes he can TRY to lock his wives up to not be able to talk to neighbours. but he cant lock all the houses up to stop other families from talking to each other. and sooner or later even his own wives will find a way to get out and talk to the neighbours.

yes russia can get its russian ISP to shut down. but this only affects russian customers. not the internet. russian customers can then just use satalite or cellular to access other international internet access servers.

when you learn about handshaking and data formats and protocols you start to see the internet is about consent, not control.

no government can just say 'tomorrow the internet shall only speak in digital russian'.. all countries, all isps and all servers have to agree to a protocol for it to then happen. and that does not happen very easily if at all. russia cannot just change/stop the internet.

Let's say you managed to decentralize the Internet somehow. You have decentralized the software. What are you going to do with the hardware that connects to your newly decentralized internet? That's centralized as well. Most of it is probably closed-source. Can you trust your CPU, your GPU, and everything you connect to your USB ports (mouses and keyboards)? If we want decentralization, shouldn't we also build our own computers and the individual hardware components?

Some amount of paranoia is OK if you are being your own bank, but not too much.

Internet is to some degree centralized, but it's not exactly easily controlled. Even people in China manage to use VPN and TOR to bypass government's control and access free media. The biggest threat for crypto is a scenario when the government just shuts down all internet connection in certain location, which is something that governments like China and Russia have been actively working on. Being internet-only currency can certainly be a downside in certain edge cases, but this doesn't mean that crypto as a whole is centralized.

I guess the interpretation of decentralization is a bit wrong here. What I think decentralization of bitcoin means is that I am free to use whenever I want to use it, its not the case with my money sitting in banks (the centralized). Secondary, IMO Eth is not a decentralized crypto since it has a founder and there is a community of developers maintaining the blockchain.

You shouldn't be so obsessed with all the "centralized vs.decentralized" thing.
Many industries and many parts of our life are centralized and making them decentralized will simply break them.Being stuck in the centralization=bad and decentralization=good paradigm is a great oversimplification,if you ask me.
The economy and the entire human civilization are driven by two processes-competition and cooperation.
Sometimes competition can increase the levels of efficiency in a system,but sometimes cooperation can bring synergy and more benefits for the people/entities,who are cooperating.
Is competition similar to decentralization and is cooperation similar to centralization?
I think that the human civilization needs both centralization and decentralization,but in the right niches and industries.

There is no such thing as fully decentralized,,, I think this is the point we all need to understand and accept. The internet is in parts centralized and in parts not, it is the best case of how decentralization can work, when you look at how it is run and accessed all over the world.

With crypto, Bitcoin is the most decentralized of all, I believe followed by Ethereum. There is no possibility for total decentralization, but always the possibility for more decentralization, which happens with Bitcoin more and more.

This is the fundamental reason why the next step of decentralisation is needed to plan for.

"They" do not have the good of "we the people" at heart, which is getting more blatantly obvious by the day now.

As in becomes the world's most used and accepted payment method? I don't see that happening. If they can't govern it, they don't want it.

Tell that to Ross Ulbricht and those who were operating Silk Road and see how far that gets you. I mean sure, you can create a dark web marketplace and the government can't simply shut it down. But let's not kid ourselves that people and services can't be stopped, blocked, and shut down when there is enough interest to do so.

you can verify a signature by your self it means any tx even without internet.
if is still on internet, (blockchain) try to modify it.
satellite doesn't need internet to work. there is a product that allow to receive/send tx without internet https://blockstream.com/satellite/

While you are right and ISPs may silence this and that, you're omitting that:
1. In a democratic country the ISP will go for profit, hence won't completely silence a customer.
2. If the ISP filters certain things then tunneling / VPN can, in most cases "fix" this.

So the ISP cannot create a perfect "wall" if one is... resourceful.

So while your suppositions may stand correct in a dictatorship, the rest of the world will just go as usual. And the rest of the world is big enough to not be seen as centralized (else we can end up to "bitcoin is centralized: one can mine it only from Earth" odd exaggerations).

I think that's because the government is operating a number of those dark web sites or at least keeping close tabs on them to follow money flows to build social graphs, mine data, and collect intel, etc.

No, I didn't know that, but it being possible makes sense.

Otherwise, I enjoy your reflection of my description above. My purpose here is not to criticise, but to see what Ideas could possibly be valid in the future when the next step of the evolution in decentralisation is due. We, as a civilisation, seldom look forward, but seem to stride to keep things as they are, until a next step is forced by crisis or stimulated by genius breakthrough. Without ideas beyond where we are at in any given moment, there is no future but a repetition of the past.

---

With your argument banks are not centralised either, because there are many banks all over the world.

I know ISP's are not one entity. But they are all centralised in the way that each of them facilitate access for more than one singular user each. I believe that all countries have a cooperation between ISP's and governments, which have the potentiality of ISP's being used as tools by tyrannical leaders to silence opposition. That is the type of centralisation that is definitely not beneficial for humanity.

I get the idea that blockchain runs on the internet and you're connecting on it as the internet is controlled by a central power and they're the ISPs. And as for ISPs, they're controlled by the government. But with that comparison, I'll give you an idea and example of a decentralized place. Are dark web and deep web centralized? They're also running on the internet but there's no way to control them. The government can't even stop them.

the internet is interconnected...yes..
..but ISP's are not centralised under one company, which are all using one DNS

its funny how you start your idea by literally using a plural to describe ISP's and not a singular context.

just because computers are networked together does not make them a single entity controlled by a single point of failure/entity.

the internet has different ISP's in different countries with different policies. if it was all centralised, wouldnt you think russia would have taken out the US 'subsidiary' of your imaginary conglomerate by now

There are not and can't be any decentralized projects on planet Earth because our solar system is extremely centralized because (1) the sun is a single point of failure in our system (if it fails, so does everything including our decentralized project), (2) we depend on the sun and hope that it will not burn us, in fact it is an authoritarian system, which means that is antithetical to the very concept of decentralized systems, (3) the systems that we build on Earth matter neither for the sun nor the Universe. In short, Bitcoin doesn't make sense and solves no real problems of universal scale.


Do you know you can become your own ISP and grant access to yourself?

Indeed, you are correct.

But consider the situation where crypto more or less takes over, and tyrannical leaders use regulation, ISP's and controlled infrastructure to block the whole phenomenon to keep control over the population. We've seen it in several countries already. I believe it is a discussion that needs to be had, not least including people much smarter and more technologically experienced than me.

Your arguments are more philosophical rather than technical and real. If we start going down that path we would soon realize that even your being is not decentralized simply because you can philosophically argue about anything and bring reasons why you found truth where there is no facts.

The blockchain is still on the internet.


The sattellite is connecting to the internet, isn't it?
And, The blockchain is still on the internet.


Which one?


I agree, that is why I want to know what ideas other people have about this. The only decentralized payment method today is to exchange goods and services for other goods and services, which is highly unflexible.