Alright, let's see.
What is the advantage to choosing 10 minutes instead of a faster rate?
If the consensus rule was 5 minutes between blocks, then currently the blockchain would be weighting much more than now, around the double amount. For example, it was 1 minute instead of 10 and each block weighted 1MB, just like now, then the blockchain would be around 3 TBs (assuming that most of the blocks aren't empty).
— So what, BlackHatCoiner? Does it matter the size of the blockchain?Yes it does. The heaviest the chain, the hardest it is to retain the decentralization. Compared to every other altcoin, Bitcoin is the
"most decentralized one". What I mean by that: It has, by far, the most offered-distributed effort. This is why I quoted-marked that little part. You can either say that something is centralized or decentralized, but this is how
I measure the decentralization.
You need to remember the US dollar is the world reserve currency. They are taxing 80% of the world with inflation!
I'm pretty sure that "they" have much better solutions. You just have to understand what you're attacking. In this case, I wouldn't say that going against Bitcoin is the first thing on their list. As for the quoted part, what does it have to do? You don't really believe that Bitcoin will replace dollar's position, do you?
A previous poster on here said the NSA created the backbone of the bitcoin network with backdoor vulnerabilities. Perhaps they don't need to go through the expense of a 51% attack. They can pull the plug whenever they want. Heck, the establishment probably created it and own most of the bitcoin and are just doing a big pump and dump scheme.
Yes, the hash function, Bitcoin uses, was firstly introduced by NSA. If you understand the way a hash function works, you can
gently defy that previous poster's propaganda spread.