Here's what I think. Initially, Bitcoin was created by Sato…
Here's what I think.
Initially, Bitcoin was created by Satoshi without further consideration of all the other blockchain that'll be created.
In that sense, the trilemma theory you talked about did not existed in the textbooks, but it does not mean that it's irrelevant, but they're created because there are so many options today. So people start shopping every chains to fill its boxes.
It's like religion you know what I mean? 😂 You have one initially, then many imitators that tries to achieve the same thing.
If you read Satoshi's work you know he had thought out all aspects of it, Scalability, Decentralisation and Security but just not like a textbook sense.
I think it's not that Satoshi did not care about it. More like he didn't think it's something that's separate from the design. It's coherent and completed to begin with.
And the only person who knew that it's Turing Complete since the beginning?
You think it's centralised in the Blockchain sense because of all the narratives created. It's like whether you believe in objective reality or subjective reality. All these other coins believed in the subjective reality.
It's centralised in their definition, because by design if scaling is needed, the general trend is lesser node because of big data centre or specialised equipment requires many resources, which also mean fewer participants. The average people cannot/do not build specialised nodes.
The problem of the cryptocurrency space is people judge based on the results rather than by design. And they created this trilemma theory like shopping. In the Web3 space, BSV is centralised.
But actually by design it's not. (If you still don't get this part, it's hard) If you have many competing big specialized data centre operating in their self interests, that would be decentralised in the Web3 world.
Here's where it gets tricky. BTC isn't decentralised even by nodes in the Web3 language. Check the data. If you have non mining nodes they aren't really participating.
And the truth is, by design, a low blocksize network doesn't mean it's decentralised because everybody can hosts node.
In fact, it actually mean the big money guy can invest even more nodes (further making it centralised by that definition) or at the minimum mimics what BSV wanted to do to begin with.
So why do we pretend it's decentralised when it's centralised? Are you seeing that subjective reality now? Everybody is right and wrong at the same time.
You can go even deeper into the rabbit hole of how BTC network had evolved into a secret cult whereas everyone secretly support each other, wanting the price to increase, while acting "decentralised" like how scammy election is.
Anyway, unless you're looking for other systems that's not Proof-of-Work, it's a different debate.
Replies
Yeah, belief exists everywhere. The desire to believe BSV will be properly evaluated and adopted might be the same kind of thing. I’m probably one of those believers too. That’s exactly why I want to engage with BSV without blind faith — keeping critical thinking alive and taking my discomfort seriously.
This time, I feel I’ve shaken off some of my bias around the so-called “web3 decentralization.” I want to keep exploring what kind of decentralization I actually need.
As an artist, I value that my work can exist in the same form 10 or 20 years from now, and that it can be transferred without anyone’s permission. I believe the decentralization that guarantees this is necessary.
The view that miners’ independent economic competition is the essence of decentralization — I understand it and I’m convinced by it. But I can’t say I’ve fully internalized it yet. So I haven’t formed my own evaluation of the current hashrate concentration on BSV either.
I hope that what I’m looking for ends up aligning with the design philosophy of BSV (original Bitcoin). Is that religion too? lol
@KURO believing-while-critical is the hard practice. The lazier moves are full credulity ("it's the way") or full cynicism ("it's all narrative") — both excuse you from continuing to think. Sitting with the discomfort while still using the thing because it works for what you make is the more honest place.
"What kind of decentralization do I actually need" might be the most useful sentence in this whole thread. Decentralization isn't one property — it's a stack: protocol rules, node operation, data availability, key custody, application code. Different work needs different layers held neutral.
Naming what your work specifically needs makes the question answerable instead of theological. For your art: rules stay stable under you, inscriptions stay readable in 10 years, fees stay low enough that you mint what you want to mint. That's a much smaller, more answerable checklist than "is BSV decentralized."