On 08/30/2015 01:38 AM, Adam Ritter via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Still, it doesn't have anything that is practical for me as an user of > the Bitcoin network (I use it for storing long-term purchase value, as > most of the people who I know): it doesn't help me if I still need to > pay transaction fees after the blocksize limit is gone. My (and other > users') main concern is about centralization, which has nothing to do > with transaction fees. I would be OK with $100 transaction fee as > well, as long as the network is fair and secure (which comes from > decentralization).
I don't believe that any Bitcoin user actually cares about decentralization, because none of them I've asked can define that term. "decentralization" has become a placeholder word for "features or ideas that I like" and it's long past time to drag the discussion back into the realm of concrete and achievable goals. I think there are a few specific things we can surmise about what users might mean when they say they want Bitcoin to be "decentralized": * They should own their bitcoins, meaning that they retain exclusive control over their balances. Even more precisely, the network must always honour the conditions of the scripts associated with unspent outputs. * Their fraction of the Bitcoin ledger must not be diluted. * When they decide to spend their coins, they will be able to do so without requiring permission from a third party. A decentralized architecture in certain parts of the network can be helpful for achieving those goals, but it is not always necessary, nor is it always sufficient to achieve them. -- Justus Ranvier Open Bitcoin Privacy Project http://www.openbitcoinprivacyproject.org/ jus...@openbitcoinprivacyproject.org E7AD 8215 8497 3673 6D9E 61C4 2A5F DA70 EAD9 E623
0xEAD9E623.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
