From d94d45589eb83779d84891d96543142f2507f260 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Matt Corallo Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 11:46:43 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] Fix typos --- _posts/2015-01-14-decentralization.md | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/_posts/2015-01-14-decentralization.md b/_posts/2015-01-14-decentralization.md index ce99900..b77c578 100644 --- a/_posts/2015-01-14-decentralization.md +++ b/_posts/2015-01-14-decentralization.md @@ -1,9 +1,9 @@ --- layout: post -title: Role of Decentralization in Bitcoin +title: The Role of Decentralization in Bitcoin --- -Bitcoiners, from Bitcoin Core developers to long-time Bitcoin enthusiasts to recent /r/Bitcoin discoverers, love to talk about how Bitcoin's decentralization is it's ultimate feature. Rarely, however, do you see anyone explain why decentralization matters - surely it's an interesting property from a computer science perspective, but why should consumers, businesses or investors care? This post is in attempt to write out why decentralization is foundational to Bitcoin's utility and, somewhat more importantly, set up future posts talking about when it isn't. +Bitcoiners, from Bitcoin Core developers to long-time Bitcoin enthusiasts to recent /r/Bitcoin discoverers, love to talk about how Bitcoin's decentralization is its ultimate feature. Rarely, however, do you see anyone explain why decentralization matters - surely it's an interesting property from a computer science perspective, but why should consumers, businesses or investors care? This post is an attempt to write out why decentralization is foundational to Bitcoin's utility and, somewhat more importantly, set up future posts talking about when it isn't. When Bitcoiners talk about decentralization, the first thing that comes up is Bitcoin's oft-touted lack of inherent third-party trust. While well-placed trust is a requirement for many systems to operate efficiently, when trust has been misplaced systems can become incredibly fragile. Take, for example, trust in US banks before the establishment of the FDIC. While access to banking services allowed for more convenience and allowed many companies to operate more efficiently, banks were known to collapse, taking all customer funds with them. While certainly not a big deal for most consumers in the western world today, transactions in much of the world pass through banks that are only marginally trustworthy, at best. Even given the state of consumer protections in the west, individuals are not universally protected from loss across borders and over certain value. Worse, regulations which allow individual government officials to seize assets unilaterally have become common. Especially in the US, the now infamous Operation Choke Point and civil asset forfeiture programs have allowed law enforcement officials and private institutions to seize financial assets and deny financial services with little to no oversight. Thus, removing trusted custodians and creating a system with liquid, unseizable assets has the potential to provide more reliable financial services to many who might otherwise not be able to operate efficiently, or at all. This unseizability of Bitcoin is made possible only through its lack of a centralized trust requirement. While centralized e-cash and financial systems have tried to provide such reliability, regulations and business realities have nearly universally prevented it. -- 2.39.5