Insightful article from @LynAldenContact. I love this question:
“[…] are there use-cases for a partially-centralized and partially-decentralized database?”
My answer is no. Because it’s a highly slippery slope. 1/
lynalden.com/proof-of-stake/
“[…] are there use-cases for a partially-centralized and partially-decentralized database?”
My answer is no. Because it’s a highly slippery slope. 1/
lynalden.com/proof-of-stake/
It is evidenced by the dilemma Ethereum faces when dealing with challengers.
You can’t claim “you’re not decentralized enough” when decentralization is a fuzzy metric, and especially when you don’t have a clear set of principles like Bitcoin. 2/
You can’t claim “you’re not decentralized enough” when decentralization is a fuzzy metric, and especially when you don’t have a clear set of principles like Bitcoin. 2/
Part of what makes decentralization fuzzy is that it’s only a means, not an end. And the end is not nigh.
What we want is not decentralization for decentralization's sake, but something else. 3/
What we want is not decentralization for decentralization's sake, but something else. 3/
Decentralization mostly matters in worst-case and very long-term scenarios, for which most people don’t care about.
Like wars, economic sanctions, pandemics, hyperinflation, etc. Long-tail sort of events that humans simply aren’t wired to cope with day-to-day. 4/
Like wars, economic sanctions, pandemics, hyperinflation, etc. Long-tail sort of events that humans simply aren’t wired to cope with day-to-day. 4/
So if you are half-assed about decentralization, you are essentially full-assed about decentralization. There is no in-between. 5/
A thing in motion tends to stay in motion. Until it crashes into something and implodes. This is altcoins.
A thing at rest tends to stay at rest. And it has a chance to be an anchor of stability. This is Bitcoin. 6/
A thing at rest tends to stay at rest. And it has a chance to be an anchor of stability. This is Bitcoin. 6/
Bitcoin, for its own part, also needs to stay vigilant against centralization forces.
And this is one advantage that IMHO gold has over Bitcoin. Gold will forever be gold (thanks to its enormous up-front PoW), even if we collectively all lose memory tomorrow. 7/
And this is one advantage that IMHO gold has over Bitcoin. Gold will forever be gold (thanks to its enormous up-front PoW), even if we collectively all lose memory tomorrow. 7/
A little bit of complacency, and decay might creep in.
That’s why it’s super important for Bitcoin to have clear principles from the beginning. And hope people many years from now will still remember what they are. 8/
That’s why it’s super important for Bitcoin to have clear principles from the beginning. And hope people many years from now will still remember what they are. 8/
If we do manage to keep Bitcoin alive, we'll get to a place we've never been before: planet-wide cooperation at maximum efficiency.
A new Dunbar level. 9/
hugonguyen.medium.com/bitcoin-and-th…
A new Dunbar level. 9/
hugonguyen.medium.com/bitcoin-and-th…
Clarification: this is under the context of global adversarial networks.
Obviously for apps/services where you know and trust the providers, semi-centralized can be useful. E.g. Multisig or Liquid.
Obviously for apps/services where you know and trust the providers, semi-centralized can be useful. E.g. Multisig or Liquid.
https://twitter.com/hugohanoi/status/1466147025431379969
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
