[ Argumentum ad Ignorantiam ]
I'm guessing you don't quite understand the nuances behind the idea icebreaker is trying to lead you to.. or maybe you outright disagree. Here is Peter Wuille's version of the same logic:
Quote
I see centralization and scalability as a trade-off, and for better or for worse, the block chain only offers one trade-off. I want to see technology
built on top that introduces lower levels of trust than typical fully centralized systems, while offering increased convenience, speed, reliability, and scale. I just don't think that all of that can happen on the lowest layer without hurting everything built on top. We need different trade-offs, and the blockchain is just one, but a very fundamental one.
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/009908.htmlbuilt on top that introduces lower levels of trust than typical fully centralized systems, while offering increased convenience, speed, reliability, and scale. I just don't think that all of that can happen on the lowest layer without hurting everything built on top. We need different trade-offs, and the blockchain is just one, but a very fundamental one.
Thank you for that beautifully conclusive and elegantly instructive quote, which may be restated as
Wuille's Razor: Layer 1 scalability is inversely proportional to decentralization.
Is the logic behind this really so nuanced? To me, it seems completely obvious. But not everyone enjoys my effortless grasp of economics, systems theory, and computer science.
