Gregory's Server@Gargron @hypolite what I mean is there isn't much decentralized about "money". Money is ALWAYS centrally controlled, without such, Price Discovery mechanisms (among else) collapse..... whether that central control is a more traditional institutional order, such as the BIS/Central Banking structure, or something more "nu age" such as "A.I." is of little significance to the ultimate end.
That anything but "chaotic"/"free running" structure(s) exist is arguably one of the largest benefits of the open ledger implementations. The centralization of control isn't even hidden and is open for all to see and actively observe. BitCoin had well openly bit the dust in these regards by 2013 when a single entity could be seen to yield 5%+ of the total volume control.
"Dark DAO" vulnerabilities and exploits, mass proliferation of chipset vulnerabilities that can work around encryption, the underlying natures of HFT and things like "spoofie", the list goes on, have only served to compound and solidify the existence of the "elephant in the room".
That there's not a single point failure node to bring it all to a stop, down, or render the faith of participants a non-sequitur (shy of something like a massive EMP); sure, it's arguably "decentralized" in such limited scope regard. However, such scope doesn't at all speak to the central control nature. Perhaps a more positive (if not also absurd) outlook, call IT GORT on the beat.
That anything but "chaotic"/"free running" structure(s) exist is arguably one of the largest benefits of the open ledger implementations. The centralization of control isn't even hidden and is open for all to see and actively observe. BitCoin had well openly bit the dust in these regards by 2013 when a single entity could be seen to yield 5%+ of the total volume control.
"Dark DAO" vulnerabilities and exploits, mass proliferation of chipset vulnerabilities that can work around encryption, the underlying natures of HFT and things like "spoofie", the list goes on, have only served to compound and solidify the existence of the "elephant in the room".
That there's not a single point failure node to bring it all to a stop, down, or render the faith of participants a non-sequitur (shy of something like a massive EMP); sure, it's arguably "decentralized" in such limited scope regard. However, such scope doesn't at all speak to the central control nature. Perhaps a more positive (if not also absurd) outlook, call IT GORT on the beat.
