This weekend, Mempool announced their upcoming Mempool Accelerator service, prompting many in the Bitcoin community to call out the centralizing effects it could have on the Bitcoin network.
Mempool isn't the only service to be called out as a centralizing force, they're just the most recent example. Many services from wallets to exchanges to mining pools to LN implementations have at one point or another been called centralizing forces by members of the Bitcoin community.
The purpose of this discussion is to talk about the effects of various centralizing forces on the network, and distill the specific aspects of Bitcoin that must be protected from centralization.
A few questions...
- Which components of the Bitcoin protocol, network, and asset must remain decentralized for Bitcoin to succeed?
- Is it possible for centralization to be reversed once a single entity has a majority market share in a specific domain?
- Which projects or initiatives are most concerning to you as a potential centralizing force?
- Are there any examples of instances in which centralization could benefit Bitcoin?
I had a fantastic time at my first bitcoin meetup aside from PubKey events last night. I think I'll do a write up about it in a few days, but I must mention this. I'm a little hard of hearing, so after one guy introduced himself to the group I wasn't sure if I missed his name. I asked him what his name was again, and, without skipping a beat, he smirked and said "nice try, fed." I knew I would feel at home.