One could argue that at this point in its history it stands to benefit more from that efficiency than it would from more robust decentralization. When adoption

One could argue that at this point in its history it stands to benefit more from that efficiency than it would from more robust decentralization. When adoption is low it stands to reason centralization would be high, and so it enables them to move faster to increase adoption, and hence lower centralization as other players and stakeholders enter the game. However it does also stand the risk of allowing the current influential parties (the developers or miners) to influence the system in their favor. So far though, I don't think this has been the case, but we'll see how this situation plays out.