Too Centralized to Fail? A Bitcoin Network Analysis

As the title provocatively suggests, in this article we explore empirically and question on the basis of research outcomes the implications of one of the most distinctive features of Bitcoin as a digital currency: the positively advertised de-centralization of its network and the often derived claim...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Fiammetta Corradi, Lorenzo Pagliaro
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Globus et Locus 2021-07-01
Series:Glocalism: Journal of Culture, Politics and Innovation
Subjects:
Online Access:https://glocalismjournal.org/too-centralized-to-fail-a-bitcoin-network-analysis/
id doaj-d47d67d2d39e4b459a82d28ebb90567a
record_format Article
spelling doaj-d47d67d2d39e4b459a82d28ebb90567a2021-07-08T08:24:49ZengGlobus et LocusGlocalism: Journal of Culture, Politics and Innovation2283-79492283-79492021-07-012021110.12893/gjcpi.2021.1.5Too Centralized to Fail? A Bitcoin Network AnalysisFiammetta CorradiLorenzo PagliaroAs the title provocatively suggests, in this article we explore empirically and question on the basis of research outcomes the implications of one of the most distinctive features of Bitcoin as a digital currency: the positively advertised de-centralization of its network and the often derived claim of egalitarianism alleged to the peer-to-peer system. In order to assess degrees and trends of network de-centralization we follow two tracks. First, we analyze a snapshot of BTC transactions taken in October 2020, basing our explorations on a subset of the “crypto_bitcoin” dataset publicly available on Google Cloud Platform and applying some of the more relevant network analysis tools, like degrees and prestige. Then we extend the analysis to the overall Bitcoin system, tracing the structural transformations it has witnessed over time with regard to the hash-rate distribution. Through a longitudinal comparison, we come to show that the number of competitors in the network have decreased over time, reducing the initial outright pluralism of the actors in the system, and gradually melting down into “special nodes”, whose power has grown over time. Such centralization trends, together with the China-centered geographical distribution of the major mining pools, might have had important implications for Bitcoin success as well as they might for its future.https://glocalismjournal.org/too-centralized-to-fail-a-bitcoin-network-analysis/bitcoinnetwork analysisde-centralized networkmining poolsprestige
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Fiammetta Corradi
Lorenzo Pagliaro
spellingShingle Fiammetta Corradi
Lorenzo Pagliaro
Too Centralized to Fail? A Bitcoin Network Analysis
Glocalism: Journal of Culture, Politics and Innovation
bitcoin
network analysis
de-centralized network
mining pools
prestige
author_facet Fiammetta Corradi
Lorenzo Pagliaro
author_sort Fiammetta Corradi
title Too Centralized to Fail? A Bitcoin Network Analysis
title_short Too Centralized to Fail? A Bitcoin Network Analysis
title_full Too Centralized to Fail? A Bitcoin Network Analysis
title_fullStr Too Centralized to Fail? A Bitcoin Network Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Too Centralized to Fail? A Bitcoin Network Analysis
title_sort too centralized to fail? a bitcoin network analysis
publisher Globus et Locus
series Glocalism: Journal of Culture, Politics and Innovation
issn 2283-7949
2283-7949
publishDate 2021-07-01
description As the title provocatively suggests, in this article we explore empirically and question on the basis of research outcomes the implications of one of the most distinctive features of Bitcoin as a digital currency: the positively advertised de-centralization of its network and the often derived claim of egalitarianism alleged to the peer-to-peer system. In order to assess degrees and trends of network de-centralization we follow two tracks. First, we analyze a snapshot of BTC transactions taken in October 2020, basing our explorations on a subset of the “crypto_bitcoin” dataset publicly available on Google Cloud Platform and applying some of the more relevant network analysis tools, like degrees and prestige. Then we extend the analysis to the overall Bitcoin system, tracing the structural transformations it has witnessed over time with regard to the hash-rate distribution. Through a longitudinal comparison, we come to show that the number of competitors in the network have decreased over time, reducing the initial outright pluralism of the actors in the system, and gradually melting down into “special nodes”, whose power has grown over time. Such centralization trends, together with the China-centered geographical distribution of the major mining pools, might have had important implications for Bitcoin success as well as they might for its future.
topic bitcoin
network analysis
de-centralized network
mining pools
prestige
url https://glocalismjournal.org/too-centralized-to-fail-a-bitcoin-network-analysis/
work_keys_str_mv AT fiammettacorradi toocentralizedtofailabitcoinnetworkanalysis
AT lorenzopagliaro toocentralizedtofailabitcoinnetworkanalysis
_version_ 1721313714563448832