| >centralized systems It bothers me when people talk about (de)centralization because I think it's more ambiguous than appears at first and the definition needs to be examined more closely. Things "on the blockchain" may be physically decentralized, and may not be controlled by one entity, but aren't they usually logically more centralized? Consider real estate, which sometimes people fantasize about moving it to a blockchain registry. It probably seems natural to many people especially if they live in a country where that's how it works now, only the national government keeps the land registry. But in the US, there isn't a national registry that determines who owns what. It's an oddity kind of like the absence of a proper national ID card or gun registry. If we switched to a system that utilized crypto, it would be definitely marketed as "decentralized", but it would be a profound move towards centralization in a different sense. If the code had a flaw then everybody would be screwed, whereas currently we have this inefficient system with title insurance and so on, but if something goes wrong it's a local issue. I can't be a true believer when I feel like the language has been corrupted and there isn't terminology to express things correctly so maybe people can't even think the thoughts they need to. |