Bitcoin has always been about decentralization and putting control in the hands of its users. But over the years, some have questioned whether it can be taken over—or hijacked—by individuals, groups, or even external forces. Let’s break this down and explore what it means for the future of the world’s leading cryptocurrency.
What Does It Mean to Hijack Bitcoin?
The recent release of a book called Hijacking Bitcoin by Roger Ver raises an interesting discussion: Is Bitcoin still the decentralized currency that Satoshi Nakamoto envisioned? Has it stayed true to its original purpose, or has it been influenced by outside forces?
The Block Size Debate
A major turning point for Bitcoin happened in 2017, during what’s often referred to as the Block Size War. This was a debate about how large Bitcoin blocks should be. Blocks are the chunks of data that contain transactions, and at the time, they were capped at 1 MB. Some groups wanted to increase this limit to allow more transactions per block, which they believed would make the network faster and better for users.
Others argued that larger blocks would create problems. They pointed out that increasing the size would make it harder for individuals to run nodes—computers that verify Bitcoin transactions and enforce its rules. In places with slower internet or limited access to advanced hardware, this would mean fewer people could participate in the network. Over time, this could centralize control in the hands of large organizations, which goes against Bitcoin’s core values.
The debate led to a split, or “fork,” that created Bitcoin Cash, a separate cryptocurrency with larger blocks. While Bitcoin Cash aimed to solve certain issues, it didn’t gain widespread use, and Bitcoin remained the preferred choice for most users.
Bitcoin is Decentralized
The Block Size War showed why decentralization is so important. The strength of Bitcoin comes from its users who run nodes. These users collectively decide the rules of the network, not miners or companies. During the Block Size War, even though miners and businesses supported larger blocks, users rejected them. By refusing to accept changes they didn’t agree with, they ensured Bitcoin stayed true to its principles.
Running your own node gives you control over the version of Bitcoin you use. This is why you often hear the phrase, “Not your node, not your rules.” Decentralization ensures that no single entity can decide how Bitcoin works or alter its rules without widespread agreement.
What About Bitcoin Cash?
Bitcoin Cash, the fork that came out of the Block Size War, promoted itself as a better version of Bitcoin. However, its adoption has been limited. Its hash rate—the measure of how much computing power secures the network—is far lower than Bitcoin’s. This suggests that fewer miners are choosing to work on the Bitcoin Cash network.
Bitcoin Cash’s transaction volume is also much smaller. While Bitcoin blocks are consistently full of transactions, Bitcoin Cash doesn’t see the same level of activity. For most users, Bitcoin remains the preferred option because it prioritizes decentralization and security.
Bitcoin Staying True to its Values
The story of Bitcoin reminds us of why decentralization is so important. Its users, not corporations or governments, control its rules. While debates like the Block Size War test these principles, they also show why they’re so important. Running your own node and learning about the fundamentals help keep Bitcoin so resilient.
Discussions as these may seem complex, but they’re part of what makes Bitcoin unique. Bitcoin is a currency for everyone. Its open and decentralized design allows everyone to have a say in how it works. Bitcoin has the ability to resist outside influences depends on its community. Whether it’s forks like Bitcoin Cash or other challenges, the true of Bitcoin power lies in the hands of its users who uphold its values of decentralization and transparency.