Nick Szabo  🔑

I did read that. I am not sure that means is centralised. I do not even think that is a problem and for sure is not worst than what we have now. I'd like opinions from people like @giacomozucco @Beautyon_ @Excellion

It is not true that Bitcoin is "economically centralized"; that is not even a real term. Anyone can buy BTC right now and use; it is irrelevant that some people have more Bitcoin than others; that's like saying the internet is "unfair" because Google has large data centers.

Be wary of men from California who are against the idea of being wealthy. They don't mind at all that the Federal Reserve has control over the supply and form of money, which has destroyed the value of the dollar and hurt the poor. Common misconceptions about BTC/money are rife.

I am far from against the idea of being wealthy. I've just seen technology hype cycles go through too many promises of decentralisation that turned out to be pipe dreams. See "The law of conservation attractive profits."

It's also worth noting that there is no correlation between ownership and addresses. Anyone that is wealthy in bitcoin, but has a good wallet and sense of privacy, probably has hundreds or thousands of addresses under his control.

And how does this relate to my argument about the cost of mining leading to economic centralization? Anyone can still create a website, but the web is effectively centralized by data. Bitcoin followed a similar path even faster than the web, but centralized by mining costs.

You are confusing, among other things, mining hash power with control of addresses, they are two very different things.

Hey Tim, come on my show and we can talk though this stuff. Twitter is a bad medium when there is so much ground to cover. DM me.