Quote from: larry_vw_1955 on Today at 10:26:53 AM

Quote from: ETFbitcoin on Today at 09:59:26 AM

I don't know how what exactly you heard (and how you remember it), but it probably refer to hashrate distribution between multiple pools. But according to Blockchair, hashrate distribution on Bitcoin (https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/charts/hashrate-distribution) is more healthy compared with BSV (https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-sv/charts/hashrate-distribution).

"More healthy" doesnt mean healthy though. I think that graphic proves my point. You have bitcoin mining power concentrated into about 5 main pools. Yes, BSV is even worse at 2 main pools but they are both not anywhere near being "distributed". They both have a large "Unknown" percentage which is roughly the same for each so that cancels out.

I agree it's not "ideal" distribution, but
1. It's common problem among PoW coins (see charts for different coin).
2. Miner could switch pool anytime if it's known certain pool doing malicious action.
3. Both have large percentage "Unknown" pool/miner, but it doesn't cancel out.

Quote from: larry_vw_1955 on Today at 10:26:53 AM

Quote from: NotATether on Today at 09:43:31 AM

It is only a problem for actual P2P sharing protocols such as Bittorrent (which I hope makes it clear that such technology's ports will be blocked by ISPs, and you getting sent eviction notices from your ISP)

i actually heard or read somewhere that running a bitcoin node some isps don't like that and will issue you a warning for it. not sure how true that is...

Are you referring to this https://www.dslreports.com/shownews/No-ATT-is-Not-Blocking-Ports-Used-by-Bitcoin-134992?