The changes BSV makes to the protocol will inevitably centralize the protocol,
You'll need to be more specific. Which changes exactly are you speaking of?
I certainly hope we are not headed down some semantic rabbit hole about who changed what... but...
The most obvious change. They have taken the big block ethos to it's end. They did not only lift block size limitations, but the community has been building applications and uses that encourage as much use of the blockchain as possible.
Well, there is that, aye.
Perhaps it is in the nature of a semantic rabbit hole, but your use of the future tense for a past enhancement threw me off track. I thought you were referring to some nebulous future changes.
They ridicule the BTC camp for it's Raspberry Pi nodes and have embraced the idea that nodes (which for them are de facto miners) will be big server farms pushing the boundaries of storage space, network bandwidth and computational resources.
Well, yes. I get that many think that huge numbers of non-mining fully-validating clients bring security to the system. I just find such notions delusional.
In the end, the entities with the power are the entities with the most to lose - the miners. The thing that keeps the miners from acting nefarious is the threat of users -- measured by economic power, not trivially sybillable validators -- abandoning their generated chain en masse. Which is the brilliant design left us by satoshi.
And even if non-mining validators _actually_ held any power: Why would we want to artificially constrain the potentially world-changing power of this network to a lowest common denominator of irresponsible neckbeard hobbyists unable to make the proper life choices to enable them to leave mommy's basement? The notion is pure folly.