Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by CryptoPunk 1927 days ago
>>That wasn’t the tradeoff. The tradeoff was that increasing transaction throughput would also increase the risk to loss of decentralization and thus effectively the systemic catastrophic failure of Bitcoin. Without decentralization it’s just technological trash.

There's no reasonable case for there being a systemic risk to Bitcoin from node operators needing Netflix streaming levels of bandwidth.

>>This is a fundamental and irreconcilable philosophical difference. You think third parties can be trusted indefinitely and safely integrated into a core role in a decentralized system. That kind of mindset is why Ethereum is being run almost entirely on Consensys’s centralized Infura database.

Completely disingenuous characterization of my argument, complete with a disingenuous characterization of Ethereum's decentralization profile.

One more time: Bitcoin could remain fully decentralized, with tens of millions of people capable of running full nodes, with 100X greater throughput.