3 ms·

> Isn't it a failure of a decentralized system the fact that most, if not all, persons using it end up depending on a centralized system? The centralized syste

> Isn't it a failure of a decentralized system the fact that most, if not all, persons using it end up depending on a centralized system? The centralized system you refer to here is the status quo (banks, fiat currencies, etc.) For all practical purposes, you can't bootstrap a new decentralized monetary system without depending on an existing one -- value needs to be transferrable between the two entities until most of the world has migrated. This isn't a failure of decentralized systems -- it's just the cost of any large-scale transformation with huge powerful incumbents.

Domenic_S 9y ago
> This isn't a failure of decentralized systems -- it's just the cost of any large-scale transformation with huge powerful incumbents. This is equivocation bordering on intentional dishonesty. GP is saying that without engaging the incumbents, the decentralized system would have absorbed his money and given him nothing in return. That is in no possible way a win for decentralization. Crypto proponents assert that the world is better without centralized currency/money systems. Yet when push comes to shove, people have been forced to engage with the centralized systems in order to force the people behind the decentralized systems to do the right thing.
- DennisP 9y ago
  > without engaging the incumbents, the decentralized system would have absorbed his money and given him nothing I don't see how that follows, given that the failure was at VISA, a centralized system, in its interaction with Coinbase, another centralized system. The decentralized cryptocurrencies continue to work as designed.
  - spookthesunset 9y ago
    > The decentralized cryptocurrencies continue to work as designed. Well then they aren't very well designed, are they... I mean, if they don't interface with the real world in a workable way, who's at fault?

Domenic_S 9y ago

> This isn't a failure of decentralized systems -- it's just the cost of any large-scale transformation with huge powerful incumbents. This is equivocation bordering on intentional dishonesty. GP is saying that without engaging the incumbents, the decentralized system would have absorbed his money and given him nothing in return. That is in no possible way a win for decentralization. Crypto proponents assert that the world is better without centralized currency/money systems. Yet when push comes to shove, people have been forced to engage with the centralized systems in order to force the people behind the decentralized systems to do the right thing.

DennisP 9y ago
> without engaging the incumbents, the decentralized system would have absorbed his money and given him nothing I don't see how that follows, given that the failure was at VISA, a centralized system, in its interaction with Coinbase, another centralized system. The decentralized cryptocurrencies continue to work as designed.
- spookthesunset 9y ago
  > The decentralized cryptocurrencies continue to work as designed. Well then they aren't very well designed, are they... I mean, if they don't interface with the real world in a workable way, who's at fault?