3 ms·
Incorrect. The nodes control the miners. If miners don't mine according to the wishes of the node operator, their blocks are rejected. This was demonstrated in
by npoc 2y ago
Incorrect. The nodes control the miners. If miners don't mine according to the wishes of the node operator, their blocks are rejected.
This was demonstrated in the block-size wars.
- akimbostrawman 2y agoAnd those miners are owned by a disproportionately smaller number using ASCI farms unobtainable by most owner/user which is the opposite of being decentralized. You seem to be spinning in a circle
- npoc 2y agoNope. No circle. What the nodes say goes. The nodes are the vote of the people. Clear? As for centralisation of mining - you're mistaking ASIC farms with mining pools. Miners can switch mining pools in milliseconds if a mining pool goes rogue.
- akimbostrawman 2y agoThis isn't about mining pools but btc mining as a whole. Almost no one who holds btc mines because the only way to do that without heavy losses and actually contribute to the network requires ASICs and the only ones who have them are ASIC farms = centralization, opposite of truly decentralized not only in technical terms (non ASIC resistant) but reality.
- npoc 2y agoDo gold miners need to hold gold? Do gold holders need to mine gold? There are all types of miners, those with a single ASIC miner to those that have a warehouse full. Its completely untrue that the only people who own ASICs are farms. Anyone can buy and run a single ASIC miner competitively if they have a source of cheap (i.e. unwanted) energy. As I mentioned earlier, mining is inherently decentralised geographically, because as the demand for the cheap energy in any one location increases, so does its price. Miners are therefore effectively geographically repelled from one another. Pools mean that groups of individual miners with just a small number of ASICs each, are creating hash-rates that compete with large companies who own vast swathes of ASICs.