,
5 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
If I had to summarize the many thoughtful comments on this, it would be to say that the imprecision of the language of decentralization is at a point where it is causing more problems in terms of inaccurate implications than it is solving them as a shorthand.
To be fair, maybe that trade off was always the case and we should have been using precise terms from the beginning, but whether or not “decentralized” worked as a simplified explainer before, it seems to be pretty problematic now.
@zooko captures a lot of this
And I guess one last point. This conversation is more than semantics because it’s now causing headaches for the protocol because of expectations the language they used created in people. In other words...
They might be executing what they’re trying to do incredibly well, but if the language has made people think they’re supposed to be executing something different or in a different way, that doesn’t matter
