Quote

Also I will not contribute to a foundation that doesn't have the same views (PM me if you want the reasons why the foundation is not worthy of my contributions) as me is not hindering the software. What is a hinder is one person knowing too much about the entire codebase and no one else stepping up and creating another full node software to compete with this. There always needs checks and balances and this one things that is not decentralized and doesn't have the correct checks.

The problem with decentralization and extreme resiliency is that it is EXPENSIVE. It is EXPENSIVE to educate a developer into knowing the codebase and working on it fulltime. It is EXPENSIVE to build a completely separate node software when it can be concentrated into one project. It is EXPENSIVE to make bitcoin totally resilient against any governmental attacks, any privacy-breaking attempt, any bugs in the system.

Security is expensive. Think of all the locks, the policemen, the soldiers, military R&D, mining rigs, and all the bank guards in the world. Now think of the money that could be spent on something more useful and relevant to our lives if everyone is a goodyshoes.

So you want resiliency and security from "gavin dies, we're screwed"? Well, are you willing to pay for the cost or providing said resiliency and security? It seems that you are bent on decentralization, resiliency, and security at any cost.

There are no such things as a free lunch.