/biz/ - Business & Finance

>ITS CENTRALIZED OKAY NOT DECENTRALIZED STOP NOT SAYING THAT

>>54760601

>>54760601
Prove it loser

>>54760601
You had 14 years.

>>54760666
BitcoinXT fiasco, Lobbying to Lawmakers and the existence of Blockstream

>>54760601
>stays a faggot

>>54760711
Lmao nigger you are retarded

>>54760711
>BitcoinXT
How many nodes run this garbage today?
>Lobbying to Lawmakers
So?
>Existence of Blockstream
Explain how they have any control over the BTC network

>>54760698
/thread

>>54760601
imagine the salt in 2030

Go ahead and shill your shitcoin, op

>>54760750
blockstream is a completely irrelevant marginalized player in bitcoin. it's a company that just burns vc money and doesn't make a single cent of profit. basically a clever scam made solely for the reason that the founders never have to sell their corn and still get paid.

>>54760601
Gold is also centralized

>>54760601
always was

>>54760601
not even close faggot, in fact it's the most decentralized crypto in existence. meanwhile 50% of ETH's staking power is controlled by 3 centralized entities. I'm not even a BTC maxi, in fact I think BTC maxis are dumb as dogshit, but there is a very clear reason why BTC is still the king.

>>54760601
it's so fucking over bros
at least I will continue to use my duck slot machine (Poolparty) in peace until it's all over for real, or until an atomic bomb drops on us

>>54763967
>there is a very clear reason why BTC is still the king
why?

>>54763967
Yeah, because it's centralised and used to manipulate the whole crypto market.

>>54760750
>>54760735
>He doesn't know why BitcoinXT exists in the first place
LMG you're 21 and found out about Bitcoin during the last bullrun. Go figure out who Mike Hearn is and why he left Bitcoin core.

>Blockstream
The company that controls Bitcoin's commit keys, who can singlehandedly push any bullshit update they want. Like the time they disabled op_return and a bunch of other op codes just to spite bitpay.
Or the time(s) they disabled or refused to add features that would've radically improved Bitcoin, like Ethereum or AVAX (BitcoinNG).
Bitcoin had NFTs and all that de-fi shit back in 2014, until Blockstream decided "you know what, fuck de-fi".
But I wouldn't expect troglodytes on /biz/ to know all that.

>>54767367
because it's the most reliable thing on the planet. code basically hasn't changed in years and there the decentralization factor is off the chart. nakamoto coefficient is in the thousands or some shit, ETH is 3 (used to be much higher but the autistic college dropout fucked up the merge(wow what a surprise!))

>>54767574
>Yeah, because it's centralised
no it isn't you dumb nigger

>>54767824
>muh op_return
>muh DeFi
>muh NFTs
no one wants that gay shit bloating up the chain. BTC is a decentralized digital currency, nothing else. nobody wants to see BTC turn into BSV, bloated centralized shitchain filled with CP.

somewhat agree with the BitcoinNG bit though, however it's too risky to change the consensus mechanism and one of BTC"s best attributes is it's reliability. the gains are not worth the risk(or even the perception of risk).

>>54768121
>nakamoto coefficient
Please tell me if there's some extra special reasoning that goes along with this meme metric whenever bitcoin loses but the basic premise seems to be more full nodes = higher score
Monero wins: https://twitter.com/MoneroTime/status/1647957495422263303

While in the obvious measure of decentralisation, mining, BTC has two pools with >50% of the hash rate, so a coefficient of 2
https://m.btc.com/stats/pool

Also worth pointing out that in terms of individual miners, it is likely that they are far, far more decentralised on Monero.

>>54760711
you mean the users told
- all the large miners
- all the large exchanges
- nearly all of the popular figure heads
to fuck off, and that makes it centralized?

it's amazing how one event filtered so many of you into never getting a chance at making it.

>>54760601
BTC is more decentralizzed than $SCHIZO

Join us as we create and launch $SCHIZO token tonight, the most centralized token of all time telegram.schizo.army

>>54768370
monero isn't even worth talking about because it's horrendously insecure with the hash rate it has. but not, it's not more decentralized due to its unprofitability to mine.

>pools
why not just say you don't understand how proof of work works before writing all that text and save everyone the time?

>>54768408
>monero isn't even worth talking about
Cope

The rest of your post is very ironic. You must have missed the last paragraph of my post but I'll explain with extra reference to your point about unprofitability. The fact that it is unprofitable to go out and buy (or worse, manufacture) a bunch of miners, specifically to mine Monero means that most of the mining gets done by people who already own the hardware for other reasons. There are a lot of people that own CPUs. Even if they they all go to the first pool on Google and mine to it Monero is more decentralised than bitcoin. Nobody owns bitcoin miners except the manufacturers and a few autistic retards paying a premium.

>>54768370
the meme metric does a pretty good job at quantifying decentralization as long as you apply it correctly which you obviously don't know how. we don't measure mining pools as a point of centralization due to how frictionless entry and exit is. it costs nothing to point to another mining pool and there are plenty of them to choose from. it's also relatively easy to become a full node.

in a similar line of reasoning, we don't use cloud providers as a point of centralization. For most crypto validators, cloud providers are relatively simple to enter and exit. Not as frictionless as mining pools, but the difference is only going from minutes to hours. However, imagine if we did measure Nakamoto Coefficients at the cloud provider level. Every PoS coin would have a very low number, probably around 3-5. So that's not a very useful application of this metric as it tells us very little in comparisons and doesn't even come close to representing DEFACTO DECENTRALIZATION which is the only thing we care about since we aren't autistic niggers.

Now take Ethereum. Due to poor design (specifically the implementation of slashing combined with low rewards) there is a massive disincentive to run a small full node. or even a medium sized one. basically everyone is forced to stake with giant exchanges like Lido, Coinbase, and Kraken. To make things worse, they can't unstake. Basically a Maximum friction environment, the opposite of a mining pool. Even if they could unstake, then what? go to a smaller full node and probably get slashed? even worse is the affect of DeFi, where large exchanges are further incentivizing centralization by handing out what are essentially ETH IOUs to anyone who lets them borrow and stake their ETH. It's a fucking disgrace.

>>54768370
also I don't really care about Monero or it's metrics. neat coin, but what's the point in hiding your money if it can't be stolen in the first place? BTC provides the latter and thus makes Monero irrelevant

>>54768523
>they can't unstake
??? Except they can now... Are you slow or something?

>>54768523
Well yeah, Ethereum is a joke, that was obvious from day one but people talk seriously about it because of its market cap. For the same reason people don't think they need to consider Monero but if they ever did they would realise it BTFOs every single "crypto currency" in existence. Bitcoiners have become too cocky because they've allowed themselves to see Ethereum as their competition. That's only true as long as you're thinking about a battle of the ponzis and ponzi infrastructure. To a large extent that is what bitcoin has become. If you ignore gambling markets (I wouldn't even call them speculative at this point since people aren't speculating on anything real) and look at things like real world adoption and use, then Monero is very close, if not ahead of Bitcoin in many aspects.

>>54768539
Crypto can be stolen especially if everyone knows how much you have.

>>54768581
Yes, but if you never spend it, no one will even know it's yours! Checkmate monerotards!

>>54768561
oh, I hadn't heard, probably because of how embarrasing this whole merge ordeal has been. only took the slavic college dropout 3 months to fix. aaaand you still have to wait 2 weeks in line. what a piece of shit.

>>54768581
only if they torture your seed phrase out of you. and if you live in a shithole like that then I recommend either spending some of your crypto to move somewhere else. or you could use a multisig service. or just don't go around advertising your fucking BTC address. jesus christ, it's default pseudonymous, don't be an idiot.

>>54768580
sure, Monero might be better than BTC, but BTC is still BTC. and BTC maxis might be retarded but Monero community are literal terrorists and pedophiles, at least that's what the government thinks.

>>54768607
This is actually a feature! By not being able to spend without risking your life, you remain a hodler and don't risk becoming poor by selling!

>>54768616
>just don't go around advertising your fucking BTC address. jesus christ, it's default pseudonymous, don't be an idiot
Making any purchase whatsoever is advertising your BTC address. Face to face? Yeah, they see you. Online? Potentially thousands of employees with access to your payment right next to your name and home address.

>>54768607
>Yes, but if you never spend it, no one will even know it's yours!

>>54768635
>Monero community are literal terrorists and pedophiles, at least that's what the government thinks.
I think the government knows as well as anyone who the pedophiles and terrorists are (hint: it's the government).

>>54768652
>Making any purchase whatsoever is advertising your BTC address.
>spending BTC
ngmi, BTC is unironically only for buying and holding

but seriously, if XMR can facilitate payments like that and actually scale to VISA levels then I will sell all my shitcoins and by XMR. but it will never scale, so that puts it in the same category as BTC aka digital gold that you bury in your mind instead of your yard.

>>54768677
Even without any kind of sidechains, Monero scales to visa levels.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RJ5HDmuucY

>>54760601
>>Becomes centralized
it's mining difficulty is making it centralized desu

>>54768616
>oh, I hadn't heard, probably because of how embarrasing this whole merge ordeal has been. only took the slavic college dropout 3 months to fix. aaaand you still have to wait 2 weeks in line. what a piece of shit.
dumb fucking maxi.Most unstaking is done by kraken because they're forced to do so.
rn, staking > unstaking
https://twitter.com/odin_free/status/1651840490575110146
eth is also deflationary now, unlike btc. cope more

>>54768151
>...Nobody wants...
So why did you blocksissies reenable it?
>It's too risky, mate, just use my totally not centralized liquid network, and this other thing called lightning which I definitely don't have vested interest in.

There are still more transactions on random ETH shitcoins than all the Bitcoin sidechains combined, you can say "no one wanted it" yeah, no one who works at blockstream.

Everyone WANTS a Bitcoin that's fast, cheap and can do more than send/receive. No one wants a "settlement layer".

>>54760601
I dumping Bit coin for this :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZ1QK4yjzF0

why? , because that is impossible to loose

>>54768668
The end of monero and the darkweb are antithetical to modern civilization. If people are allowed to murder people they don't like with money then all bets are off. Or maybe I'm being melodramatic.

>>54767824
Radiant (ticker: RXD) solves this.

>>54767824
How does bitcoinxt prove that BTC is centralized. The fact that the block size wars happened, and looking where we are today, shows that BTC is resistant to centralization.

>>54768494
no what happens is monero gets centralized as we saw by those with existing hardware resources and new miners aren't ever incentivized because there's no possibility for profit in most parts of the world even above electricity usage alone.

monero has many of its incentives completely broken, not just mining, but also the core privacy technology requires relative high transaction fees and instead the geniuses that forked bytecoin made sure they stay close to zero forever.

lots of average iqs in charge over there.

>>54760601
mining and development have become centralized
nodes are still decentralized, and can reject any blocks or updates they want

>>54770915
the market is full of normies that fundamentally don't understand bitcoin but think they have the capability to understand some random alt that itself is mostly dependent on bitcoin for it's valuation.

unwrap their arguments and they're basically saying if the closed door new york agreement meetings ended up causing changes to bitcoin's validation rules it somehow makes it more decentralized.
their position makes more sense when you realize these people only understand "crypto" when it's framed as tech startups launching and running blockchains (i.e. 98% of altcoins) than when it's a decentralized network of self-interested actors incentivized by the system itself.

>>54760601
>Becomes the new SHIB
>More decentralized than BTC
Holy fuck PLEBROS did we do it?

>>54770987
>At the end of 2022, on a global scale, it is estimated that approximately 374 million x86-compatible chips were shipped (Arm products are not taken into consideration). The revenue of suppliers amounted to about $65 billion.
That's a lot of potential new miners despite apparently no incentive. This is what's possible when "miners" isn't defined as ASIC manufacturers like it is for Bitcoin.

And for someone spouting off about system incentives, you don't seem to understand the point of mining. Any miner is a good miner as long their incentives align with the network. Barrier to entry to Monero mining is low for any random person who already owns a decent CPU and has cheap electricity. This person makes money when they mine blocks according to the rules of the network and they don't make money by attacking it. Barrier to entry is high for someone who wants to attack the network by getting 51% of the hashrate because they are competing against people who would essentially be losing lots of money if they didn't already have their setup by happenstance. By contrast, attacking Bitcoin would only require outcompeting a few Chinese companies, which even if you failed to achieve the necessary hashrate, could still be profitable.