That would be less centralized, yes. The fact that one organization, the fed, has the unilateral and exclusive authority to create more money (essentially unlim

That would be less centralized, yes. The fact that one organization, the fed, has the unilateral and exclusive authority to create more money (essentially unlimited) would still be a very important point of centralization though. > And what about a smart contract that requires participants to make a deposit with the smart contract itself? What do you mean "requires"? Is there forced participation? Presumably anybody could make a competitor to this smart contract. I think I'd need a more specific example to understand exactly what you mean here. It also depends on the contract itself. A contract that has an owner encoded into it who can make unilateral decisions is more centralized than an ownerless / immutable one.