Anon on Nostr: Satoshi Nakamoto’s early communications, including emails and forum posts, clearly ...
Satoshi Nakamoto’s early communications, including emails and forum posts, clearly articulated a vision for Bitcoin as a decentralized, P2P electronic cash system. Central to this vision were principles of user sovereignty, privacy, and resistance to censorship. However, as Bitcoin has evolved, and it has strayed significantly from these foundational ideals.
One of the most pressing issues is the centralization of mining power, which undermines Bitcoin's original intent. A handful of mining pools now control a substantial portion of the network's hash rate, raising concerns about the potential for censorship and manipulation and all if them are at the mercy of benevolent regulation.
This centralization not only threatens the security of the network but also compromises its ability to function as a truly censorship resistant currency. If a small number of entities can dictate which transactions are processed, the essence of what Satoshi envisioned a decentralized and open financial system becomes increasingly tenuous.
In Satoshi's early discussions, there was a clear intent to address scalability challenges, including the potential to increase the block size to accommodate more transactions on the base layer. Satoshi recognized that as Bitcoin gained popularity, the network would need to handle a growing volume of transactions without sacrificing its core principles. In emails and forum posts, Satoshi expressed a willingness to explore solutions that would allow for greater transaction throughput while maintaining decentralization.
One notable initiative that emerged during this period was P2Pool, a decentralized mining pool designed to allow miners to work together without relying on centralized entities. P2Pool aimed to enhance decentralization by enabling miners to contribute their hashing power while maintaining control over their individual contributions. However, despite its innovative approach, P2Pool development was largely abandoned around 12 years ago. The decision to set it aside by core developers and the broader community reflects a shift in focus toward other solutions, like lighting that instead bringing decentralization does the opposite.
The abandonment of P2Pool underscores a broader challenge within the Bitcoin ecosystem, the struggle to balance innovation with the community's evolving priorities. While alternative solutions have emerged, the centralization of mining power remains a critical issue that continues to threaten the foundational principles of Bitcoin.
It is essential to reflect on Satoshi's foundational principles and the lessons learned from initiatives like P2Pool. The centralization of mining power and the ongoing debates about scalability underscore the need for a renewed commitment to user sovereignty and decentralization.
All that i mention before has solution, but who knows why core devs and big names in the community are agaisnt this improvements and are in favor of centralized solutions like Lightning and eCash.
That's why in my vision i think bitcoin was hijacked.
I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this perspective.
One of the most pressing issues is the centralization of mining power, which undermines Bitcoin's original intent. A handful of mining pools now control a substantial portion of the network's hash rate, raising concerns about the potential for censorship and manipulation and all if them are at the mercy of benevolent regulation.
This centralization not only threatens the security of the network but also compromises its ability to function as a truly censorship resistant currency. If a small number of entities can dictate which transactions are processed, the essence of what Satoshi envisioned a decentralized and open financial system becomes increasingly tenuous.
In Satoshi's early discussions, there was a clear intent to address scalability challenges, including the potential to increase the block size to accommodate more transactions on the base layer. Satoshi recognized that as Bitcoin gained popularity, the network would need to handle a growing volume of transactions without sacrificing its core principles. In emails and forum posts, Satoshi expressed a willingness to explore solutions that would allow for greater transaction throughput while maintaining decentralization.
One notable initiative that emerged during this period was P2Pool, a decentralized mining pool designed to allow miners to work together without relying on centralized entities. P2Pool aimed to enhance decentralization by enabling miners to contribute their hashing power while maintaining control over their individual contributions. However, despite its innovative approach, P2Pool development was largely abandoned around 12 years ago. The decision to set it aside by core developers and the broader community reflects a shift in focus toward other solutions, like lighting that instead bringing decentralization does the opposite.
The abandonment of P2Pool underscores a broader challenge within the Bitcoin ecosystem, the struggle to balance innovation with the community's evolving priorities. While alternative solutions have emerged, the centralization of mining power remains a critical issue that continues to threaten the foundational principles of Bitcoin.
It is essential to reflect on Satoshi's foundational principles and the lessons learned from initiatives like P2Pool. The centralization of mining power and the ongoing debates about scalability underscore the need for a renewed commitment to user sovereignty and decentralization.
All that i mention before has solution, but who knows why core devs and big names in the community are agaisnt this improvements and are in favor of centralized solutions like Lightning and eCash.
That's why in my vision i think bitcoin was hijacked.
I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this perspective.