pull down to refresh
100 sats \ 10 replies \ @jakoyoh629 27 Sep \ parent \ on: What is your understanding of the process to change Bitcoin Core? bitcoin
I'm not saying they run the show by themselves; it's a balance between the miners, the devs, and the hodlers. Nobody's trying to screw anyone over, but for me, Bitcoin is all about the hashpower—that's where the security comes from. If that core thing fails, how is everything else supposed to survive?
Because people. See Risk Sharing Principle:
Bitcoin is not secured by blockchains, hash power, validation, decentralization, cryptography, open source or game theory - it is secured by people.Technology is never the root of system security. Technology is a tool to help people secure what they value. Security requires people to act. A server cannot be secured by a firewall if there is no lock on the door to the server room, and a lock cannot secure the server room without a guard to monitor the door, and a guard cannot secure the door without risk of personal harm.
reply
Aight, I get it. Bitcoin's a tool, and the people are the ones who secure it and share the risk. If everyone takes on their piece, the whole thing's safer. Word.
Now, I could be wrong, but the way I see it—even with my limited knowledge—the cats who control the hashpower are the ones with the most control. I ain't saying they're in charge all by themselves, but they got the real power on the ground. Theoretically, you can talk about other scenarios, sure. Like, other mining groups (ocean-knots) are becoming a real option cause they're stacking up some serious hashpower now.
But to me, hashpower is the whole lifeblood of Bitcoin.
reply
Just because there are less pools than there are pure economic actors doesn't mean that the group as a whole has more power, it's just that it's less distributed because not enough people have their solar bitaxe yet (hyperbole, but for a reason - block template centralization is an issue.)
Like, other mining groups (ocean-knots) are becoming a real option cause they're stacking up some serious hashpower now.
See pool share - it's under 2% and it looks like the peaks correlate with people renting off nicehash. I'd be totes happy if Ocean has 10% of the blocks, even if they won't mine coinjoins or p2a. Diversity is good.
reply
Miners have no power. And that's a good thing
The market decides which set of consensus rules has the most valuable token, and then the miners flock to it
Miners are sheep, following the money, while the (economic) nodes are the shepherds
It's possible that a lot of stubborn miners will keep their hashrate on the least-valuable chain for a long time. But that's not my problem 😜.
The only exception is in the extremely unlikely event that a large group of miners are able to coordinate themselves to do an extended 51% attack on the chain they don't like. But that won't happen as it requires too much coordination and will be insanely expensive
We, the node runners, must stay vigilant and constantly take actions to ensure miners don't gain any power, as things could change in future
reply
The market decides which set of consensus rules has the most valuable token, and then the miners flock to it
What token? Sounds like shitcoin. Ahhh
reply
reply
I thought it was just coins on Bitcoin, not tokens.
reply
reply
concepts are always shifting, but in my book, any token is just a shitcoin, even if it's stamped on Bitcoin.
reply
Yes, but what I mean is this: if someone would create a concept in which you'd stamp a
coin on the bitcoin blockchain rather than a token, does that make it credible? I'd say no.There is a weakness in thinking that
coin > token instead of saying bitcoin > coin/token. That weakness is that shitcoiners will exploit your narrative because you've generalized, and why, after some years of watching all the abuse, the idea has become "if it isn't bitcoin, then it's a shitcoin". And even then, some will pitch their paper bitcoin, be it FTX, Saylor, BitGo-backed-bridges-to-shitchains or your favorite sidechain/misnomered-L2, as Bitcoin. And people fall for this shit, which is awful.This is why there is no benefit to weakening this part of the maxi narrative, at all.
reply