I encourage whole Byteball team to see some Antonopoulos videos to know why byteball is not decentralized, and why you should not market the platform focusing on that. Because it is not true.
12 witnesses = 12 central points of failure but, of course, with the same power of another node (no absolute power like dpos crap) and marked as trustable by majority of users.
Byteball distributes trust amongst 12 witnesses. It is a distributed trust system, not a decentralized one. Decentralized implies no single point of failure, and this is not the case.
I think new platform name should reflect all those things.
What is the single point of failure then? There is none. In fact, I would argue that Byteball is more decentralized by design than Bitcoin or Ethereum. When we have a lot more than 12 different witnesses to choose from it will also be more decentralized in practice.
Netflix is not decentralized. But Netflix uses decentralized technologies in order to reduce bandwidth costs.
Byteball is not decentralized. But Byteball uses decentralized technologies in order to coordinate admision of new units in the database and distribute it to all full nodes.
You can use decentralized technologies without forming a decentralized consensus. But that does not make platform consensus "magically decentralized".