Breaking News

Why bitcoin is no longer decentralized?

Here's Wikipedia's explanation of bitcoin ( Bitcoin is a cryptocurrency and is also a worldwide payment system, the first decentralized Digital currency.

When it comes to bitcoin, Wikipedia and everyone are always repeating the word "decentralized."

But Bitcoin is not

Wikipedia - Decentralization. Decentralization is a concept that is relative to centralization or centralization, a process of distributing or disseminating functions and rights.

The original purpose of a bit was to be designed to be decentralized, but it has not been fully realized and will never be realized because the POW mechanism is flawed.

I do not even need to use words to explain it, please take a good look at the following chart it! (By trying we know that having more than 51% share has the power to dominate certain things)

1. "Centralization" is the de-centralization of only one central subject

2. Or center

It is. . . . . . ? It is still centered (on the right half occupy more than 50% of the ratio, they are the most important center)
Let's take a look at bitcoin (hash distribution, from

From a technical point of view, you need to manipulate 3 to 4 entities to control bitcoin, and we assume that the following mines such as Antpool,, VIABTC, F2pool and BTCtop are competing and none of the mines claimed to claim For five pools - I am deeply skeptical. The reason for Ghash's failure is that they officially announced that they had more than 51% of the computing power. Chinese miners are smarter than they are and see how well they distribute hash, as if there were no obvious leaders.
This is still a serious center, this is the miners distribution, miners are actually distributed by country. Let's go back to the real world because: The state is absolutely authoritative for the entities in its territory, and it also includes miners.
5. This is a non-Chinese and Chinese calculation of the distribution map
Now please see the third chart. Have you found the same thing?

Bitcoin, Ethereum, and all the virtual currencies that run the POW mechanism are central! You can measure it by business entity (3 ~ 4) or country (1). These are just the most obvious places where you can also see this by measuring the cloud computing platform behind the entity (if it's Amazon's cloud computing platform AWS, then it's central), the CEO's citizenship and the place of residence Whether the project is a centralized project.

In any case, it is more in line with the concept of centralization. If anybody says that they are decentralized, point out the above point of view.

This is not "too bad but we can still stand it." This is actually equivalent to game over. Bitcoin and UnionPay are 1,000 times slower to pay - but they are mostly run in China.

If you really believe and repeat that "the miners will not set or interfere with the rules," please take a look at another article on how dual payment works, -to-destroy-bitcoin-with-51-pocked-guide-for-governments-83d9bdf2ef6b
It's true you can not change consensus - there's no agreement on chain management (I think it's foolish, Tezos / Dfinity / Failsafe these platforms make it more meaningful and efficient), but that's not important. As long as you can hollow out blocks or rewrite history records on other branches by mining, you can put the blockchains in jeopardy.
You may say, "Blacks are no interest to be found." But you overlook the most important thing about decentralization. PayPal also does not freeze your bank account today - but they can do that as long as they need it. That is why there is nothing "dangerous" and "the cost of the attack" and the number of entities that you need to compromise to be insignificant.
Only through the POS mechanism may be able to help.
This is what decentralization should look like (you need to black out 51 entities), the distribution of business entities and corresponding countries. The 100 business entities in 100 countries and the three companies in one country are far less likely to be black-out!