Quote from: MarihuanaStocks on February 23, 2015, 01:24:22 PM

Quote from: HELP.org on February 22, 2015, 02:35:16 PM

Quote from: Rum152 on February 22, 2015, 02:01:16 PM

The other day I was thinking bitcoin itself is decentralized, but everything around it is centralized or striving towards being centralized. Let's just take a look at this forum for example. Here are certain people in such power that if they decide, they can destroy you - your forum nickname. Members with trust can give you negative trust for no reason and you have no way to fight against that. Admins can ban you with no reason. Isn't that the principle of "centralization" - a few people having power to do anything and with no justified reasons?

But on the other hand if you want to get something done you have to achieve a consensus of all the participants. That is slow and expensive and the world would essentially come to a halt if everything were done that way. Everybody involved should try mining and see how difficult and expensive it is and if you use Bitcoin for any length of time you run up against confirmation issues. It taking too long to be viable in certain use cases and people substitute centralized services (Bitpay, coinbase, etc.) to compensate for that.

Consent may be slow, but it's absolutely necessary.

From a semi-technical point:

Maybe it takes longer to reach a consent, but consent is the most important component in a free and peaceful society. If power got centralized a hierarchy is created.

The main problem here is our holy-grail-decision-principle : Democracy! Democracy is like a permanent 51% attack that is accepted as legit!

Democracy is a dictatorship of the majority and stands therefor diametrical opposed to any form of freedom, not to talk about any free decisions.

If we want freedom and sustainability, we need to do things in a sociocratic way. That says that the the vote of the majority has the equal value to the minority's vote.

What does that mean?

The people find something, a foundation, a consent, that brings them together. Everything above that consent has to be done on their own. For example: 20 people buy a farm and want to produce their food by themselves. Ironically there are 11 people that eat meat, 9 do not. What might happen in a democratically oriented system? Everyone pays for meat production because the majority decides to do so. In a sociocratic system they have a common foundation, the farm and the support of the community. So the decision would look like following (maybe): You find synergies in both projects and meat eaters support meat production, vegetarians finance vegetable production. Where both projects can work together, they do. Like use the same house to produce their products...asf.

So,when you talk about decentralization,don't forget that democracy is not compatible with that.

Democracy does one thing for sure: It produces hatred, strife and violence. It's just a matter of time.

That is so far outside of reality it is not worth discussing and it really has nothing to do with Bitcoin. Linking these discussions and cults to Bitcoin just makes Bitcoiners look ridiculous which is why I suggest taking the class.