Nostr Web Client

Also, there is centralisation already, geographically, in the US. If a larger block size resulted in the US government legally as well as geographically having, say 30% of the hashing power, not sure that would be any worse than the centralisation that exists now

Money Isn't Necessary 1y ago 💬 1

I don't think the US govt could have 30% of the hash power. it would take years of acquiring all newly created Asics to put into mining to compete.

the US can have the majority of hashpower, but not the govt. that'll take years to get all the new chips.

current miners can leave the country if needed. not as important where the miners are centralized as much as who the miners are. right now they aren't govt miners.

mining pools on the other hand, are centralized and needs to be addressed. probably by changing the subsidy algorithm to give all miners equal rewards. not just the winner. therefore eliminating pools.

ALSO YOU SAID BTC ISNT VALUABLE IF IT CANT BE USED AS MONEY ... being used as money is almost not even important, to me. value STORAGE is the "killer app" of Bitcoin. and it's doing that already.

no country really has a money spending problem, they have value storage problems.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Ben Ewing 1y ago

Well the govt could just buy the top US miners or pass legislation forcing a sale, a la tic toc.

Pools seem more flexible to me, since changing from a pool that suddenly has bad intentions is just a techical hurdle, not a physical one.

Don't agree with your last point. If bitcoin can't be used as money it is worthless. Extrapolate transaction fees out. Imagine fees are a million usd per transaction. You can't even buy it just to store value.