[blahblahblogger]

Honest question, but does a cryptocurrency have to be decentralized for it to be determined a cryptocurrency?

I didn't think that was the case. It may be more in the spirit of crypto but I don't think it's a hard requirement?

[Erlich_Bachman]

Because if it is not - it is simply a centralized database of payments. Like an SQL table of transactions. This has been a solved problem for decades. Visa and MC processing servers all use cryptography in many parts of the stack, and yet no one calls Visa a cryptocurrency because of that. This is why if you see anyone use the word "cryptocurrency" when in reality they talk about a legacy centralized (thus lacking all decentralizations perks) database - you know they are assuming you have no actual knowledge about the area and are trying to buzzword you.

[andreygrehov]

Forget about centralized/decentralized. There is an ecosystem around existing cryptocurrencies. Wallets, exchanges, dapps, etc. All of it wouldn't work use they an SQL table of transactions.

[zhte415]

I'm not sure that something like Vision Plus is very similar to a Blockchain.

Aside from both using cryptography, in the sense, of encryption.

So... if such buzz words are used, it seems like a huge lie.

[dagaci]

The problem with centralisation is that it enables a kind of corruption: entities can engage in both financial censorship and arbitrary money printing.

That being said a cryptocurrency does not have to be decentralised.

However it is very important to understand the difference.

Today even decentralised cyptocurrencies depend on centralised-exchanges, and the consequence is that despite the constraints built into a blockchain algorithm are able to sell unlimited amount of the crypto to users without actually being in possession of the algorithm-limited crypto.