That is exactly what Bitcoin is meant to do and how to fight against the banks, by scaling…
MC Kuky
2

You’re ignoring the fact that miners do have the ability to choose which transactions they confirm and that if 51%+ of miners don’t want a transaction to get included, they can collectively prevent it’s inclusion by ignoring (=orphaning) any blocks that do.

The more resources it takes to run a Bitcoin full node, the smaller the set of people capable of running one is and the easier it’ll be for governments to perform a regulatory capture on miners. This means that governments can then start dictating which transactions are allowed. Bitcoin would lose the only thing that really differentiates it from what we already had before.

Personally I believe the most critical thing to be whether or not it’s feasible to run a Bitcoin full node anonymously. If that ability is lost, governments can then enact laws to make requirements for which transactions miners are allowed to confirm and which not.

One aspect for what is required to run Bitcoin anonymously, is how much bandwidth you can reasonably run through Tor and other similar networks. That limit is disturbingly close, even today.

Like what you read? Give Joel Kaartinen a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.