Bitcoin Is Not Decentralized!

Hey you, welcome back to the channel. And guys, today we're going to talk about something very controversial, and that is the idea of Bitcoin not being decentralized. So probably gonna lose some of you all in this video, uh, you know, some people might get so heated, so upset, they might want to unsubscribe to the channel. And that is because in cryptocurrency there does exist the idea of the Bitcoin maximalist. And a lot of people just like Bitcoin. You know, we're tired of the government interference in our money and our privacy. We want control of that because those type things mean freedom, means economic freedom. And those are wants and needs that are so natural to being human. Uh, you can't measure it with anything. That's just something we seek, we want. It is what we deem a right. And so anytime that can be taken away, we are very offensive to any ideologies or any politics or policies that put us in those situations, and that is all very understandable. But sometimes you can want something so badly that you don't always see fully what's going on and what the situation is. So today what we're going to try to do is we're going to try to understand Bitcoin a little bit more and see just how decentralized it is and exactly what the idea of decentralization means exactly to us. So first, let's try to understand what we would consider to be decentralized, right? Because some of us may have a variety of definitions. Okay. So first, what I want to try to do is I want to try to set up some categories here on what would be considered decentralized to many of us and see if when we put Bitcoin to the test in these areas, does it really measure up like we want it to? Excuse me. So let's, let's, let's start off with that. So first, let's condense it to Bitcoin and the mining, mining operations, right? The mining pools. And then let's take the miners and let's move those from, uh, to the developers, right? The engineers, the actual engineers who work on, uh, Bitcoin. All right, so we have the miners, we have the developers, and then let's move that over to the stakeholders, right? That, you know, many of you like myself who hold Bitcoin, who hold stake in Bitcoin. And let's take all of these 3 categories and let's see how well Bitcoin holds up in each one of them. Okay, and let's see if we can try to gauge when we, when we think about decentralization. Let's see if we can try to gauge what exactly that means for each and every one of us. So let's start with the, with the mining pools, right? So in trying to understand Bitcoin and the proof-of-work algorithm and how everything works, we understand that miners mine the blocks, that secure the network, that process the transactions. And the situation with that is, if you're going to have miners doing this and running this network, uh, you know, who, who creates and who makes up this network? Is this a Is this a broad network that encompasses a network to a size where it can be translated to be decentralized and not controlled by a central authority? Because that's pretty much the idea of what decentralization of Bitcoin is all about. That there is no one entity, there is no centralized authority that would control this, right? So, and the idea of mining— who's, who's doing all the mining? Where is all the mining? Is it spread across the globe? Well, what has— and what many of us know, of course, who know anything about Bitcoin, is that there are most of the mining going on in China, right? And about 60% of the mining, well over 50%, is controlled by only 3 entities. Um, there's about 5 entities that control 60% of all the mining. And some would say then, well, Yeah, that may be true. That may very well be the case, but these are all individual people mining. Uh, they are individuals all across the world even though they are in those particular pools. Uh, and so some people say, well, still individuals, and thus it's decentralized. The problem with that though is that as these mining pools are all part of the same network, any hacking that goes into the network or any kind of government intervention against Bitcoin, when they target these networks, it's gonna be very much easier to create issues in the network as they can now target these large entities that are still one entity. right? Because they're part of this network. Another issue is the technical aspects of Bitcoin has made it to the point where you need these very large data centers, um, to mine Bitcoin. And so the concept of people being in their homes mining Bitcoin, which would have been great for decentralization but isn't quite reality, doesn't serve or bode well into the— it does— it's not efficient. So generally it goes back to these large data mining centers that are dominating Bitcoin. So in that respect, it, in my opinion, wouldn't fit the idea of decentralization. Not just my opinion, the opinion of many economists, many engineers and developers as well. Um, let's, let's move on from that to the next category. The next one was, uh, was developers and engineers, right? The people who are actually working on the infrastructure of Bitcoin, right? A lot of conspiracies have went on about that, about who these developers represent. We don't know who these developers represent in most cases, but it seems to be that many of them are representative of specific, uh, entities, and that's been proven. They've been able to find people who, uh, developers who are associated, um, and kind of, some might use the term almost like a monopoly, um, that are, that are controlling, um, uh, part of the development in the infrastructure of Bitcoin. Uh, whether that's the case or not, um, there is made, it is made clear that they are, there is a, a centralization of development in Bitcoin. Um, the next, the next part, if we move on to, um, people like myself and you all, stakeholders, people purchasing Bitcoin, people who, uh, feel that they are invested in this decentralized cryptocurrency and moving towards this economic freedom. Well, the reality of that is that the average Bitcoin wallet has about $1 to $4 in it. Uh, about 4 to 5 million wallets, uh, uh, have less than $100, and most of the, uh, value of Bitcoin is, is segregates about 1% of the Bitcoin wallets, right? So it's not decentralization, uh, in the manner of, uh, of, uh, value across the network, right? So in condensing all these categories, right, it doesn't leave a whole great deal of room for what else we could term as decentralization With the exception of just the semantical conceptual idea that the technology, how we approach it, is decentralized. And in that fashion, it's true, uh, that yes, the technology, the availability of the technology to us to a degree, and what we can do with it is somewhat decentralized, right? And it's only decentralized in the concept of we cannot identify a central authority right offhand. But based on the information and data I just relayed over to you all, it is, it is quite clear that, uh, there are these centralized authorities that control Bitcoin, right? That hold large stakes of Bitcoin that can start to dump Bitcoin and, you know, send it into this catastrophic economic crash. So you have all of that happening and all of that a great danger to Bitcoin, right? So what does that mean for us in cryptocurrency for those who are seeking this economic freedom, that Bitcoin feels so— or it seems to fall so very far short of that concept. Well, I think it's important to understand that it's not so much about it being decentralized, in my view, but it's about this movement from centralization to decentralization, right? It's, it's, it's not a state. It is a movement. Uh, now of course the best argument would be that of all the cryptocurrencies, then you would have a better situation or more decentralization Bitcoin, right? But some would even disagree with that. Some would say that it makes a lot more sense to— that Ethereum would be more decentralized. With Ethereum, you can still basically mine it at home. You can build a lot of different stuff on it. Developers just come in and build tons of different things on it. And so some people might say it might be Ethereum. What is clear to me is that they're all moving from a point of centralization to decentralization. And whereas it may be true that at this point in time Bitcoin is pretty much leading the pack in that idea of what it means to be decentralized, uh, I can certainly tell you that Bitcoin, uh, is It's— or I can say it this way, that there's— there are going to be other tokens and coins and hybrids that can achieve decentralization a great deal better than Bitcoin, right? And I know that may surprise some of you, it may knock some of you guys' socks off, but I can tell you, like, the project I'm working on now, BitcoinMYK, and, uh, if you subscribe to the channel, if you watch the channel, you probably know something about it already. But I can tell you that it will end up a great deal more decentralized than Bitcoin ever can. And that's not an attack on Bitcoin, and it's not even saying it's better than Bitcoin in the sense of Bitcoin MYK cannot exist without Bitcoin, right? What Bitcoin MYK does is it treats Bitcoin like gold. And it, and it basically becomes the money to the gold, right? So Bitcoin MYK, for all everybody who holds Bitcoin, they hold Bitcoin MYK and they can move that representative value across the network. Now here's where Bitcoin MYK gets more decentralized than any other token and why it makes more sense. Right? So instead of having mining operations where you got possibly 2 or 3 mining pools in collusion with each other, and we think they're separate, but they could be the same mining pools. What BitcoinNYK does is it gives all of the, uh, even playing field back to the people. The technology gets dumbed down. Anybody can basically come in and be one what we call a network supplier, right? Elections over the blockchain are held. You upvote these people, right? And although the tokens do represent a type of pre-mining, over time BitcoinMYK will, will basically accomplish the best decentralization distribution of any other token. And that is because Anybody can basically be a network supplier. The community votes for them over the blockchain. These people are trusted by each and every one of you to distribute tokens, and when they don't do a good job of that, you elect someone else, right? But the reason I'm saying that it's the most— the best of decentralization is because there is a centralization, as we covered earlier. In developers, and there is a centralization in miners. But in our network, we don't have that issue, which means you're going to get a lot better distribution. The point of the matter is blockchain technology really can't exist without a cryptocurrency. Many of us are coming to that conclusion. So what you need then in that case is a cryptocurrency that's well distributed, right? So you need some hybrid in the middle, and that's what BitcoinMYK provides. Proof of stake doesn't work well because then you have people with the most money stake the most tokens, right? Uh, proof of work doesn't work well because then you have the monopolies of the mining operations at the mining data centers. So the reason Bitcoin MYK works because it's attached to Bitcoin, but then it allows for the elections and better distribution with the people. With the votes being cast over the blockchain so that they cannot be, uh, manipulated or changed in some way. You can always verify the Bitcoin ledger against what's happening with the Bitcoin NYK ledger to make sure everything is copacetic, right? Make sure everything is accurate. Um, and so, uh, Whereas there are still some cons to Bitcoin MYK. It's not perfect and it's not meant to solve every issue in cryptocurrency. It— the entire idea is, as it moves more and more to this broad distribution of getting this value back to the people, uh, it becomes more decentralized in nature. And Bitcoin will not be able to do that because you'll never be able to get out the whales now. You'll never be able to change the mining structure, how it works. Although it does kind of prove what we're saying about Bitcoin moving to a state of decentralization because the Chinese mining operations has began to lose a little dominance, just a little bit, not a lot, but just a little bit to show you that there is a kind of reversal happening. Um, but we really have to understand, you know, what it is exactly that we're— what we're talking about with— when we talk about decentralization. And I think that's about the best way I can categorize what decentralization is. Of course, all this ultimately is the age-old economic battle of Austrian economics versus Keynesian economics, right? To just simplify it real quick, if you're not familiar with it, let's just make it real simple and say Austrian economics is less government interaction as possible. Whereas Keynesian economics is, uh, the powers that be, government going, if we don't step in, if we don't intervene to do something with this economy, it's going to collapse. We got to do something. You know, kind of like what you've heard with our governments over the last several years. If we don't stop in and save these banks, we're going to have the greatest economic depression the world's ever seen, right? All that kind of stuff. That's Keynesian economics, right? And Austrian is more akin to kind of like what we're getting with Bitcoin to a degree, you know, where, uh, we're just watching Bitcoin just crash, you know, and it's doing whatever it's doing, right? And, uh, there's no interference. There's nobody saying, well, hey, we need to you know, control the price and stop that, because many have discovered when you do that, you create more problems than good. But if you agree with the Keynesian side, then you say, well, this is a disaster. You know, if you were holding Bitcoin at like $20,000 and it went all the way to $3,000, uh, and you were given a choice and they said, well, look, we can step in and we can stop Bitcoin from crashing and you went, I agree with that, I don't want to lose my money and all this money I've invested in Bitcoin, $20,000, almost $20,000, $17,000, which I've lost. Um, then, and you said, somebody help me, somebody save me. Yeah, you would be a supporter of Keynesian economics. If you just went down with Bitcoin, then you would be more on the Austrian economic side. And somewhere in the middle, you have to decide which one works. For you the best. Now, I, I tend to land with I like less government interference, but I'm also very practical in the idea and the concept of what works and where Bitcoin can go at this point in time. I don't ever see it truly getting to decentralization on a level to where economists and, and scientists can come together and and decide that yes, it's fully decentralized. That's why there's a rift in it now and why you have economists saying it's not decentralized, right? So if you're interested in stuff like this and if you want something that can truly offer and bring you true decentralization, right, you should check out the Bitcoin MYK project. Now, the Bitcoin MYK project cannot bring you full privacy. It cannot bring you those things, right? In fact, Bitcoin doesn't bring you those things. Bitcoin is not private, right? It can be tracked and a variety of things. So if you're thinking— a lot of times the argument that comes up with Bitcoin is that, oh, I want my privacy and I don't want people to know I did this transaction. But that's not what Bitcoin does. You're in the wrong token, my friend, if that's what you're looking for. But now if you're looking for decentralization, and if you're looking for good distribution and real economic freedom, then you're looking for something like Bitcoin MYK. If you're looking for privacy, you might want to go over to something like Monero. Um, but I think it's very important that we have these conversations. I know the Bitcoin maximalists won't agree with me. They will bring up the concept and the idea of that this is the best thing, the most decentralized of everything. And again, I disagree with that. That's not necessarily true. And I would say that my project is moving towards that. And that's not just me trying to hype it up or get people to invest in it because you don't have to invest a dime in it because you get it free if you hold Bitcoin. So that kind of throws that whole concept out the window there. But the reason that I'm saying it's BitcoinNYK, because I truly believe it works. And I know that because It's been created and manufactured to do just that, to address those problems specifically. And so that's why I say those things. But that's all I want to say in this video. Of course, this can go on for hours and hours on end. There's a lot of good economic books about Bitcoin. There's a lot of economic theories. There are very intelligent people in this space. A lot of them have come over from Wall Street and come over from, uh, economic schools. And so they know, but there is this challenge and rift between those people and the developers who create these things, who don't share the same mindset, who don't understand economics. And when they clash together, a lot of what we're getting in this space is mass confusion and chaos that needs to be handled and solved, right? And maybe one day it will, but we're not at that point yet, and Bitcoin is not decentralized as of yet. But that's all I want to say in this video, guys. If you like content like this, don't forget to like and subscribe. Uh, if you're gonna unsubscribe, feel free to let us know headed out the door, you know, uh, uh, why you did it. And it wasn't because you, uh, don't agree with the the concept and what we're saying about Bitcoin. But we'd love to have a conversation with you all, guys. If you like content like this, don't forget to like, subscribe, and until next time, take care.