Bitcoin—the original digital currency—was designed with decentralization in mind. It was meant to now be controlled by one entity or individual, such as a central bank, and put the power into the hands of all the users on the network. Bitcoin Core (BTC) may have started out adhering to that principle, but it quickly morphed into something completely different. Over the past decade, it has become more centralized, diminishing the root of its purpose. Dr. Craig Wright explains in a recent Medium post what was initially involved when he created Bitcoin and how coins such as BTC have lost their way.
To help the crypto community better understand how BTC has become more centralized, Wright developed a detailed analogy. He starts by laying the foundation, stating, “In our experiment, let us assume 1 billion people are now running and using sequential gold. We’ll call it for the experiment an alternative form of bit gold, for it’s nothing like Bitcoin. Like with Bitcoin, a core group sets the software updates and rolls out the node software.”
Protocol changes take place along one timeline in sequential gold, with no changes happening in another. Wright develops two scenarios as the system evolves. In the first, the system is completely decentralized and the discover is a serial lottery. Blocks are randomly found and it isn’t possible to predict what the next block will be. In other words, the only way to earn money through this system is by winning the lottery. Wright explains, “Let’s keep a few people happy and make one-minute blocks. This means we have approximately 525,600 blocks every year. With our collection of 1 billion people, we now expect the average person to win the lottery once every 1900 years.”
As such, there is no economic incentive to outperform anyone else, because there’s no way to increase the odds of hitting the lottery.
In the other system, there is an incentive due to its nature. It is a system that rewards those who are online more and involves a network whose protocol changes with time. Those changes can come for a number of reasons, but what has been seen with BTC is that some of the changes have been made in order to increase the incentives to certain individuals.
Wright explains, “If the protocol is allowed to evolve, as occurs with competitors to Bitcoin such as Core coin (BTC), then we have a scenario where the network fragments unless all users are running the same version.” However, by handing control over to the development team, the fragmentation can end.
This isn’t the idea solution, though. As Wright points out, by giving the developers the control, “You allow them to take control of not only the protocol but the software updates. You allow them to force you to have updated software. Once such power is granted, the power over everything in your life has been relegated to such people. It is why Bitcoin was hijacked to create (BTC) Core coin.
“A group of people with strong ties to anarchist and criminal groups seeks power. In the true sense of 1984 doublespeak, they will tell you how they’re freeing you. They will do so as they have you relegate control and give them the power to update and change the protocol. Such is the true path of BTC (Core).”
New to Bitcoin? Check out CoinGeek’s Bitcoin for Beginners section, the ultimate resource guide to learn more about Bitcoin—as originally envisioned by Satoshi Nakamoto—and blockchain.