Centralization:

Absolutely the opposite. Darkcoin's anonymity relies on an external source, masternodes. That is a huge weakness all by itself. Those masternodes must be hosted and online to support Dark's mixing. Since most of the masternodes are hosted on servers, that means the entire masternode network itself is centralized.

Comparing on chain anonymity to centralization is the most absurd thing I've seen in a while. That's like saying Bitcoin's blockchain is a centralized solution to decentralization. What sense does that even make? Cryptonotes/Monero's on chain anonymity is far more decentralized than off chain anonymity.

Use as a currency/ Fungibility:

Again in this, Cryptonote wins by a landslide. All cryptonote transactions have some degree of anonymity with 0 being the least, and an indefinitely high # being the best(You can mix with even 100+ people, far more than darkcoin can ever offer). Cryptonote, rather Monero specifically is one of the best cases of a cryptocoin that's actual like a currency. Bitcoiners hold, and while this may help increase the price in the shortterm, it damages the coin longterm as the coin turns into a commodity instead of a currency because users regard it as an investment(Hence the term HODL). Also Bitcoiners tend to lose their coins(Lost coins), which also adds to a decline in liquidity.

However, with Darkcoin, it's 100x worse than Bitcoin's lack of use as a currency. Darkcoin's masternodes require 1000DRK. There are over 2k masternodes, that's over 200,000 darkcoins taken out of the ecosystem alone in 1 year, not even mentioning darkcoin's instamine. This means that Darkcoin has/will have extremely poor liquidity, which is essential for a currency. Couple that with users who "HODL" and users who lose darkcoins due to accidents etc, and you have a commodity, not a currency in the least.

Monero has a tail emission, so that helps account for issues such as lost coins or too many users "HODLING" instead of using it as it should be used, as a currency.