He's not wrong.
It is very concerning.
Discussion
https://v.nostr.build/jEJr.mp4 we need more miners and nodes so when they fork we continue on the real btc and we gobble it all up when they dump
True bitcoiners are not worried
Andreas is f’ing great 😂
He is wrong because he believes that they can control a consensus based protocol. They can fork off ! 🤷♂️
They don't need to fork to censor transactions from the mempool.
You’re talking about large miners. I’m talking about Bitcoin. They can fuck off
All of the pools in North America and Europe will end up in regulatory capture.
You'll wait hours or days for a rogue pool somewhere else in the world to include your non-compliant transaction into a block.
You have a very pessimistic outlook of the power of bitcoin mining. Mining will also circumvent those territories. There are cucks everywhere but also a vast amount of freedom loving people. Bitcoin isn’t captured by morons.
How fast would the majority of hash be redirected if the Gubment made decrees on those pools? Literally within hours. It’s kind of silly. This hash isn’t locked in a pool. It’s just pointing there rn. Can very easily be moved or taken off line. Pool members aren’t keen on being part of a censorship-friendly pool or a pool that would attempt a 51% attack, period. It’s a silly gripe.
If that was true they would have switched already but instead they all complied with the KYC requirements. They don't care about Bitcoin ethos they just want revenue.
They wouldn’t participate in an attack on their source of revenue. Simple game theory.
If they can fill a block with compliant transactions then they lose no revenue. You just lose out on getting your non-compliant transaction confirmed by them.
I don’t believe much if any of the hash would stay in any pool if the were openly censoring txs for any government. No chance.
There’s definitely a chance, but it’s a big risk to their business.
I don’t see it as a large threat (especially since it would require coordination and cooperation between the United States and China) but ultimately the only thing which mitigates this completely right now is the fee based model and the credible threat to fork which would render all mining equipment worthless.
Future improvements like having independent block template generation could make censorship risk even lower, but ultimately right now the most likely risk is that certain transactions would have to wait an extra cycle or two to make it in a block.
I agree that we cannot become complacent.
Tail risk with work arounds and game theory that makes it an improbable scenario. But imo it’s not a existential threat.
I’m not arguing to be complacent, but either way, there is nothing I can do personally. I think the open Network will find ways to get stronger and solve for more tail risks over time as it’s shown to do effectively over time. I know the best minds in the world are actually working on mitigating these low-probability problems but this is v low probability in my opinion.
Complying with KYC isn’t remotely close to participating in a Government orchestrated take over / 51% attack. You’re committing a slippery slope fallacy.
Nobody said anything about a 51% attack. You're misunderstanding the original post.
It would also be an ineffective strategy by censoring govt as ≈50% of blocks wouldn’t be in censorship pools. So the blacklisted addresses wouldn’t be reliably censored and the pools who complied would surely be committing suicide by compiling. It’s not going to happen.
That is old. Why did you find about this that late?