[ad_1]
The decentralization of cryptocurrency is one of the main pillars for digital currency developers. This is the reason why the topic has seen a large number of cryptic enthusiasts and analysts doing passionate research in the past. Hash long search he is among the last players to share his research statistics on the decentralization point of view for Bitcoin, Ethereum and Bitcoin Cash.
Based on the results, Bitcoin appears to be more decentralized than its ETH and BCH counterparts. This is mainly caused by the percentage control of hash rate mining pools within these network ecosystems.
The SparkPool_3 & Ethermine Dominance Within the ETH network
Research conducted by Long Hash shows that the two mining pools are responsible for more than half the hash rates within the Ethereum network. This would simply mean that the ETH altcoin is somehow inclined to centralize with respect to decentralization and therefore almost similar to the XRP. Basically, the pools that can exploit the strong hash rates are leading to a centralization effect on the nature of cryptographic coins.
Bitcoin Cash, on the other hand, is more centralized Ethereum. Statistics show that the two mining pools (BTC.com and BTC.TOP) control almost 55% of the hash rates within the BCH ecosystem. These statistics can shed new light in a cryptic world that the aspect of decentralization is being gradually compromised by powerful mining machines.
Bitcoin statistics are more interesting than those of its competing competitors. The number one crypt has been on a journey of improvement since mid-2018, when 41% of its hash rate was dominated Bitmain at 29% at the time of research. Two of the Bitmain mining pools that facilitate this dominant position are Antpool and BTC.com. At that time, stakeholders had begun to raise concerns about Bitmain's potential to control over 51% of the BTC hash rate by claiming it would pose a risk to network participants.
In addition, Bitmain's performance has been in decline in the last 30 days after most of the participants opted for other suppliers of mining pools on the market. If the company had effectively controlled more than 51% of the consent to the work done by BTC, it would have been able to confirm the percentages of fraudulent hashes. Therefore, the risk attributed to a digital asset such as BTC would also be more due to the veto decision.
Over time, the extraction through cryptography has evolved with the transition of companies to the domain of networks. Initially, the mining pools were well distributed, but this changed as the likes of Bitmain seek more dominance on the market. However, Crypto's market dynamics have not yet supported a dominant player within a specific network due to their volatile nature.
[ad_2]
Source link
