"The prevalence of enormously centralized monopolies on the internet is not a result of its technical architecture, but rather narrow business interests and a t

"The prevalence of enormously centralized monopolies on the internet is not a result of its technical architecture, but rather narrow business interests and a terminal lack of regulation." Neither business interests or regulation have anything to do with something being centralized or not. If you would launch "Thinkbeat's blog", in the traditional sense of web publishing, it is 100% centralized. Regardless of its size or your good or bad intentions. You would be in full control of it. You could intentionally retire the site, and all information and access is lost, forever. You could accidentally do that by forgetting to pay a bill. Another scenario, you publish something fishy on your blog, and get banned from the blogging platform, or whichever dependency you rely on. Further, all content on the blog is 100% owned by you, and none of it by the users. So you would also own and control comments to the blog, and arbitrarily edit or delete them. You have 100% control on everything, and users none at all. A decentralized version of your blog would be radically different. You can't just retire it. You can't permanent delete or overwrite prior entries. Commenters may actually own their own comments. I know, a blog is not a good example and a poor use case, just saying that the decentralized web very much is a difference in technical architecture.