[erikb]

The nature of single things is decentralized. Therefore every new era starts with decentralization. The internet started off quite decentralized, for instance.

But do we really have a new era here? I'm not sure if with 32 years of age I'm already too old to recognize the New and grog it. I don't feel it. I feel there's a lot of buzz around blockchain, sure. But it looks like it would be all. Bitcoin is just as centralized as banks are, for instance.

And here is where the other stuff starts. When single things start systems these systems tend to be quite centralized. That is the natural order of systems. E.g., people could manage their own bitcoins on their laptop, but they choose to have an Exchange take that effort of their hands.

Seeing centralization take a foothold and not seeing anything real besides buzz, I'd argue the bet is still against.

On the other hand I'm seeing Amazong completely automating logistics in more and more areas of life. Shouldn't that be something to look into?

[ThomPete]

I think the best way to think about this to think about the tcp/ip protocol. It's a standard protocol but it's decentralized still to this day.

Blockchain takes it further and conceptually adds history to the TCP/IP protocol. This has extreme value as it allow data to behave like physical properties.

[darawk]

> Bitcoin is just as centralized as banks are, for instance.

That's a rather odd statement. Can you justify that?

[erikb]

I've put it in the second example. People can manage their bitcoins by themselves, but instead they let exchanges manage it for them. So all the problems of centralization (exploitation of users, market manipulation, big time theft, etc) can be found in the bitcoin ecosystem as well.

You see the same history repeating, just a lot quicker. Therefore I assume whatever you do with blockchains will become a centralized system as well.

PS: If you think about it, as technology cash is even more decentralized as bitcoin. Yet banks happened.

[tcgv]

He could be talking about the issue of "mining centralization":

- https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/7dl4r3/miner_centraliz...

- https://medium.com/@cloudycalvin/potential-threats-to-bitcoi...

[hoosieree]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-08/the-bitco...

A handful of actors with a controlling stake isn't exactly the same thing as "centralized" but it's close.

[lambdadmitry]

It's also inherently "centralised throughout liquidity". Because it's both deflationary and risky, the amount of liquidity available at any given moment is small, so a willing actor with some money at hand can affect the market disproportionately. Look at the way Tether manipulated the price.

[darawk]

Not really. They're pretty different things.