4 ms·

What about the unbanked? People in high-interest countries? Cross-border payments? You present a strong claim that they "ARE still centralized and manipulated,

What about the unbanked? People in high-interest countries? Cross-border payments? You present a strong claim that they "ARE still centralized and manipulated, especially Bitcoin". Please present concrete evidence.

kgraves 5y ago
You have Transferwise and Western Union for this, the latter being there for over 100 years and still in use. Before you argue about WU fees, Bitcoin's fees are no better than Western Union's, hence Transferwise. > You present a strong claim that they "ARE still centralized and manipulated, especially Bitcoin". Please present concrete evidence. Princeton University concluded in a study that the bitcoin network is 50% controlled by 5 of the 6 bitcoin mining companies [0] [1] so how is Bitcoin decentralised If it is becoming more centralised by mining organisations and if most of the hashing power is centralised in China? That seems to be that means that Bitcoin isn't really decentralised then no? [0] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-31/bitcoin-s-network-operations-are-controlled-by-five-companies https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-31/bitcoin-s... [1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.02466.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.02466.pdf
- noidesto 5y ago
  I’d say 50% is far less then the single-entity in a centralized solution. > Before you argue about WU fees, Bitcoin's fees are no better than Western Union's, hence Transferwise. Early in a new technologies adoption there will be pain points. I consider we are still very early on. Work is actively being done to alleviate this. Still waiting on your response for high-interest countries and the unbanked. [0] https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-taproot-upgrade-dogecoin-technology https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-taproot-upgrade-dogecoin-te...
  - kgraves 5y ago
    > I’d say 50% is far less then the single-entity in a centralized solution. So even with concrete evidence, you still cannot even admit this fact that Bitcoin is currently centralised? Maybe you should read about the 51% attack [0] and then come back to me and say with a straight face about Bitcoin being decentralised. You mean the 'unbanked' can use digital wallets like M-Pesa and Paytm? What's wrong with that? [0] https://academy.binance.com/en/articles/what-is-a-51-percent-attack https://academy.binance.com/en/articles/what-is-a-51-percent...
    - noidesto 5y ago
      5 of 6 mining companies own 50%. Id be much more concerned if it was a single mining company owning 50%. I think you are the one unable to admit it isn’t centralized. By definition it isn’t centralized. Even in the current state.
- baby 5y ago
  Why are you talking about bitcoin specifically? It’s the least advanced crypto

kgraves 5y ago

You have Transferwise and Western Union for this, the latter being there for over 100 years and still in use. Before you argue about WU fees, Bitcoin's fees are no better than Western Union's, hence Transferwise. > You present a strong claim that they "ARE still centralized and manipulated, especially Bitcoin". Please present concrete evidence. Princeton University concluded in a study that the bitcoin network is 50% controlled by 5 of the 6 bitcoin mining companies [0] [1] so how is Bitcoin decentralised If it is becoming more centralised by mining organisations and if most of the hashing power is centralised in China? That seems to be that means that Bitcoin isn't really decentralised then no? [0] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-31/bitcoin-s-network-operations-are-controlled-by-five-companies https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-31/bitcoin-s... [1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.02466.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.02466.pdf

noidesto 5y ago
I’d say 50% is far less then the single-entity in a centralized solution. > Before you argue about WU fees, Bitcoin's fees are no better than Western Union's, hence Transferwise. Early in a new technologies adoption there will be pain points. I consider we are still very early on. Work is actively being done to alleviate this. Still waiting on your response for high-interest countries and the unbanked. [0] https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-taproot-upgrade-dogecoin-technology https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-taproot-upgrade-dogecoin-te...
- kgraves 5y ago
  > I’d say 50% is far less then the single-entity in a centralized solution. So even with concrete evidence, you still cannot even admit this fact that Bitcoin is currently centralised? Maybe you should read about the 51% attack [0] and then come back to me and say with a straight face about Bitcoin being decentralised. You mean the 'unbanked' can use digital wallets like M-Pesa and Paytm? What's wrong with that? [0] https://academy.binance.com/en/articles/what-is-a-51-percent-attack https://academy.binance.com/en/articles/what-is-a-51-percent...
  - noidesto 5y ago
    5 of 6 mining companies own 50%. Id be much more concerned if it was a single mining company owning 50%. I think you are the one unable to admit it isn’t centralized. By definition it isn’t centralized. Even in the current state.
baby 5y ago
Why are you talking about bitcoin specifically? It’s the least advanced crypto