3 ms·
Only somewhat I think; miners actually do have such control, and could be coerced into sanctions; it's just that no one has successfully done that (or kept quie
by rich_sasha 5y ago
Only somewhat I think; miners actually do have such control, and could be coerced into sanctions; it's just that no one has successfully done that (or kept quiet about it).
You can imagine outlawing processing some crypto transactions in some area. Miners have no choice but to comply, leading to at least a fork and massive confusion, at most to actual enforcement of the rule.
Blockchains may be censorship-resistant, but humans are not rubber hose resistant.
- miracle2k 5y ago> You can imagine outlawing processing some crypto transactions in some area. Miners have no choice but to comply, leading to at least a fork and massive confusion, at most to actual enforcement of the rule. It is not a geo-location issue. The enforcement measures in question either manage to control 50% of the hashrate or they don't. If they don't, the protocol will ignore their censorship. Yes, they could continue mining a minority fork chain, but you would need to convince Bitcoin-users and services to use the fork instead of the uncensored version. You could imagine this being done by force: ISPs block the download of the software, exchanges no longer trade it etc. The point is merely: <50%, the power is not with the miners at all; it is the users that need to be controlled.
- rich_sasha 5y agoSince China ban, 35% of mining happens on US soils: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/after-chinas-crypto-ban-who-leads-in-bitcoin-mining/ https://www.visualcapitalist.com/after-chinas-crypto-ban-who... Not so far off 50+eps