Quote from: webtaxi on June 16, 2020, 10:29:20 AM

Quote from: altcoinman on June 16, 2020, 10:24:16 AM

Quote from: webtaxi on June 16, 2020, 10:21:04 AM

Quote from: altcoinman on June 16, 2020, 10:18:17 AM

Quote from: rnold142 on June 16, 2020, 10:14:48 AM

Quote from: altcoinman on June 16, 2020, 10:10:41 AM

A great question to expand on. True, already said something like that, but I can once again reveal it. Both the blockchain in general and Bitcoin in particular at the current stage are completely controlled by a person. Updates and hard forks are an example of decentralized human control of the system, because by the decision of the majority the system can be replaced with any other one at all, and the blockchain can not oppose this, because it is just a banal tool for solving a specific problem.

well, as long as the tool works correctly, there is no need to do anything with it, let it work.

Im just saying that a person decides whether to make changes.

To control the system as a whole, it is not necessary to control each specific part of the system. A person controls the entire Bitcoin as a whole, as a system, he also decided that inside this whole system works in a certain way, not allowing to intervene in individual procedures.

Well, what if you remove a person from Bitcoin? Theoretically, what will happen to this system if mining is fully automated, and improvements associated with an increase in transaction speed, for example, will not be required.

As for the option, when mining is fully automated, and the person is not needed for updates: at the current stage it is almost unbelievable, because the programs will still crash.

agree. And the more complicated the program is, the more their failures become systematic and go to the same statistical basis on which modern microprocessors work, when it becomes enough for the statistical number of elements to work, and not 100%. Accordingly, no matter how many bulky programs of any kind, errors are inevitable, you will have to modify them.