+- 6fda5bce2882 -- 595d ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[...]+ | | | 3-4 mining pools control > 75% of the hashrate. | | | | A disgusting shame. | | | | Until further notice, Bitcoin is NOT censorship resistant. https://i.nostr.build/g53eOFvkvtI22QJt.jpg | | | +-- reply --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---+3-4 mining pools control > 75% of the hashrate. A disgusting shame. Until further notice, Bitcoin is NOT censorship resistant. https://i.nostr.build/g53eOFvkvtI22QJt.jpg
thread · root 35fb2554…11ac · depth 11 · · selected 61cbecfb…82f0
thread
root 35fb2554…11ac · depth 11 · · selected 61cbecfb…82f0
3-4 mining pools control > 75% of the hashrate.A disgusting shame.Until further notice, Bitcoin is NOT censorship resistant. https://i.nostr.build/g53eOFvkvtI22QJt.jpg
the problem I see in this reasoning then is how many generations? and how high a fee? with centralized mining,this is definitely a threat.I don't think we're in doomsday scenario yet. and my guess is we'll see more mining pools rising to the occasionin the coming years, with governments and corps taking more of an interest. we'll have to see.
I’m not good at price predictions 😂.Game theory seems to be that censors won’t bother because the fee to overcome would be relatively low.
Not if the people doing the censoring can build on top of their own blocks?
Might just take longer to accumulate censored transactions in the mempool
Or we could just recognize the current issue and work to solve it prior to any 1-2 entities having the power tocensor.
There’s a lot of hypothetical problems to be solved
Mining being centralized is not a hypothetical problem. It is the current state of things.Fortunately, those who have monopolized the hash-rate have not harmed Bitcoin.
Transactions being censored is a hypothetical problem.Mining can’t be monopolized, it’s the most competitive industry in the world.Anyone can fabricate arbitrary centralization metrics and declare a hypothetical of theoreticalcensorship-resistance, for example 100% of hashrate is on planet Earth.
nostr:npub185h9z5yxn8uc7retm0n6gkm88358lejzparxms5kmy9epr236k2qcswrdp you were (are?) extremely concerned aboutmining centralization and the risks it poses to Bitcoin. Pierre doesn’t seem terribly concerned.Would you review this thread and help me better understand both of these view points?If I recall you even suggested a nuclear option of changing to another hashing algo if we cannot fix thesituation.Pierre, I respectfully disagree with your position.
Your claim was “Until further notice, Bitcoin is NOT censorship resistant.” I think you’ve appropriately backedoff that claim to a more nuanced “there’s a risk of Bitcoin maybe not being censorship resistant in the future”