Thatās not true. You can control the hash rate of your bitaxe but that doesnāt mean your transactions canāt be censored. You need to have a lot of hash rate to prevent censorship.
Discussion
Correct, the protocol is only permissionless and zero-trust for the people projecting the most physical power. But an adversarial equilibrium emerges. This is described by Satoshi in the whitepaper in regards to a 51% attack, but the same logic applies to writing blocks to the chain.
It's conceivable that China and Russia could combine hashrate to potentially censor their adversaries transactions . This is why it's really important for the US and her allies to control enough hashrate to ensure we can still regularly add blocks to the chain. Unless our adversaries can completely censor our transactions which would require much more than 50% hashrate they are highly incentivized to continue acting in an honest way.
Also. If they did try to censor US transactions, it would degrade the value of the network for them aswell. The incentive structure is solid.
The protocol is working exactly as Satoshi designed it. He decentralized control authority of block writing to those who display the most computational power.
If you are worried about potential censorship, I suggest you summon up some watts and enter the physical power competition.
The largest mining pools were inevitably going to organizations similar to NATO and BRICS. This aligns with the way human evolution is playing out at a systemic biological level. Pure game theory. But it's important to realize that the incentive structure results in mutually assured preservation of access to the system. Not degrading access to the system even for adversaries.
I think in the long run this is true but it can get messy as these features are stress tested.
That is true but these morons in the government donāt know about that and donāt really care because they still have fiat.
Fair point. Other nation states can secretly mine. Iām hoping this is enough to keep things in balance