I find all this talk about centralization very strange
[...]
Look at the network topology and how it's evolving, most nodes has a lot of channels in both directions and it's growing rapidly.
One of the major reasons why LN might lead to centralization is:
First, the biggest downside of LN is that the recipient has to have their LN node online
This could lead to a situation where most users will actually prefer an online-wallet that also handles their respective LN-channel(s), just to spare them the hassle of running something themselves.
Of course, that's the overall trend with any online software (e.g. email being used over gmail etc.), but LN kind of encourages that kind of delegation from the user's side to service providers.
On the other hand, users are free to run their own Bitcoin and LN nodes, just the same as with running their own SMTP-sever, so it's effectively more a kind of "concentration" rather than real "centralization".