Definitely a biased article. Writer starts out with "decentralization is sooo important" but then uses that as his argument for supporting segwit and lightning being better solutions than big blocks. However, segwit encourages pretend decentralization (if you don't have the witness data, you aren't protecting the network's data) and things like lightning require gatekeepers that are even more centralized still. I'm not saying centralizing microtransactions off-chain is a problem, but the argument that decentralization is so important that we should centralize stuff is not a very good one. If the concern was really with centralization, the answer would be pruning, but attackers could easily fight against pruning with spam, and even if that wasn't a possibility, years of misuse of the blockchain as permanent data storage has lead to the opinion that pruning isn't an option.