Those are strong words, "fundamentally unsolvable problems of decentralized governance". I'm not dis/agreeing with your scenario: I also think it's quite likel

Those are strong words, "fundamentally unsolvable problems of decentralized governance". I'm not dis/agreeing with your scenario: I also think it's quite likely that this JPMorgan crypto would ossify into a de facto centralized network. But the phrase "fundamentally unsolvable" feels like it needs some harder proof or logical explanation. There are many instances of (and variations on) "decentralized governance", like open-source projects, technical or social organizations, etc. Would you say all those attempts are doomed to failure? (Or maybe that they could continue to operate despite being potentially unstable/flawed based on fundamentally unsolvable problems. Or perhaps that they all tend to become centralized.) Thinking of attempts at decentralized governance in a larger sense (including but beyond specific applications in the crypto sphere), it does seem that most of them are failing due to some inherent structural issues. I wonder whether it can be demonstrated that all such decentralized governance systems are fundamentally flawed (similar to Gödel's incompleteness theorem..?).