pull down to refresh

What would happen if a entity owns 51% of the nodes?
123 sats \ 13 comments \ @Bitcoiner1 24 Feb bitcoin
Hi, this question was asked yesterday in an event in my city and we were not able to find a good answer, so I'm here to learn from the SN community.
In the scenario where 51% of the validators node were owned or controlled by the same entity, this could be a big corporation or a Estate. How this could affect the health of Bitcoin?
Can this big player impose new rules on the rest of the nodes?
Can this big player ban txt? Or validate and broadcast the txt that they want?
We know that this is a very unlikely scenario...but, just wandering about it.
Thanks 🙏 and enjoy the weekend!
write
preview
related posts
21 sats \ 3 replies \ @btcthinker 24 Feb
It doesn't make any sense, it's just nodes owned by an entity. That would not be group consensus. Many shitcoin nodes are built by the same entity on Amazon servers. Bitcoin has no shortage of nodes, doing so is just a waste of money.
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @AJ1992 24 Feb
Referring to other cryptocurrencies as shit coins just makes you look like a cult member man. You pick that up from Darth, the big bully? You only insult what you don't know and you hate on other cryptocurrencies that have innovated and adapted to do things better than bitcoin's blockchain. Your cult fails to realize Bitcoin isn't perfect and flawless and it's blockchain can and MUST improve and evolve. Why are you so opposed to looking at any other cryptocurrency's blockchain and admitting that it's more efficient and innovative? Why are you so against Bitcoin having competitors and competition in the market? I know, because you're afraid and you're scared of being wrong. Thats sad.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @btcthinker 24 Feb
Scam is not innovation.
Characteristics of shitcoins:
  1. There is no upper limit on coin issuance.
  2. The coin distribution is not fair and the creators retain a large amount of the coin.
  3. The newly generated coin is given to the holders of the old coin.
  4. Only specific entities can participate in the node.
  5. Decentralization is a good idea, and a decentralization I can control is a better innovation.
  6. Trust me bro.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @AJ1992 24 Feb
Except you're generalizing and calling other cryptocurrencies a scam (some of them are) because of the few bad apples once again shows your fear. You want Bitcoin to be/stay a monopoly because you're invested into it. Your self interest is causing too much bias and because of that you can't see the positive qualities of any other cryptocurrency even though their blockchains are more efficient, less expensive, and more inclusive. Which by the way, Satoshi wasn't advocating for a monopoly nor were they saying Bitcoin is only for certain people. Bitcoin was created for everyone. That was Satoshi's dream and Satoshi would be for evolving to make Bitcoin more inclusive for everyone.
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @RocketNode 24 Feb
Nothing. Miners dictate the blockchain and many miners accept tx directly.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @go 24 Feb
This would be much cheaper than 51% of the asics
reply
0 sats \ 6 replies \ @DarthCoin 24 Feb freebie
From 9 years ago... https://yewtu.be/watch?v=ncPyMUfNyVM ... if they can sustain it more than 10 min...