Re: Is POW systematically doomed to get a huge monster in its midst?
Cryptocurrency is a movement and has an agenda decentralization being in its core, it is ok to question the technology's approach to decentralization but being a nah sayer who has an ideological prejudgment regarding decentralization as an absolutely impossible idea (and worse, a useless one), well, it puts one out of the crypto sphere and renders any discussion with him a useless time wasting practice.
The reference you've provided, On the Instability of Bitcoin Without the Block Reward, has nothing against decentralization as a design principle, and yet if it was the case, we wouldn't discuss it in this forum.
My point is, decentralization as an ultimate agenda, is the only thing we have in common in the crypto ecosystem, it is the cause. Without decentralization we have nothing to share and to make a dialog about.
Questioning decentralization's relevance or importance for an alternative monetary system, announcing it an absurd impossible design target, is kinda cheating and turning the table on other players, what losers usually do.
It is fair to ask questions about how and in what degree bitcoin has achieved decentralization and how it can be improved/evolved to reach to a better (more decentralized) state but ideologically challenging the core concept and saying that we are safer in the hands of few elites in the top of the food chain? No! It is not fair. It is cheating in the most ridiculous way a bitcointalk member could ever do it
