0 sats \ 3 replies \ @Scoresby OP 10 Apr \ parent \ on: 47% of Bitcoin hashrate uses same custodian bitcoin
Yeah, it doesn't seem good.
But I don't think people make stupid decisions in general, so I really want to figure out: what is the motivation here?
We all think that centralization is bad and trusting somebody else to hold your keys is bad, but here are people with a ton of skin in the game doing exactly the opposite of what makes sense.
If they lose it themselves, there is no-one to blame. In the age of tort I would imagine you could try to sue the pants off the custodian if they lose it. I haven't seen any custodian contracts but I imagine that is the thinking. There is no one to sue if you lose it yourself
reply
Right, so they do it out of convenience, and just count on the courts as their insurance. Still, no one makes a decision and thinks this is a stupid decision. so in their minds, it must make sense somehow.
reply
Considering that miners need to sell/send payouts frequently to keep up with their operating costs and distribute it to the individual miners it probably has a lot to do with convenience. Plus it appears part of the contract give the custodian first dibs on the rare sats as they are skimming them out.
reply