Part Two, here we go.

Everyone okay with me writing part two? Cool thanks.

I just pretended to require consensus there.

So, I am perfectly fine with the idea that cryptocurrency is actually resolving a certain level of centralization. Don't worry, I do get it. But, what is really happening is that the source of centralization has changed, and it has been created under a different structure, but this makes me think of a lyric from The Who: "meet the new boss, same as the old boss".

Someone made Bitcoin. It worked.

Someone saw scaling issues and worked to make a solution. They disagreed with the other guys working on the same thing; they split to another very vocal project called Bitcoin Cash. I call it Bitcoin Crash, because that is exactly what came next. BCH's team couldn't agree on their solution either, and they split. So, now we have Bitcoin Core, Bitcoin Cash, and Bitcoin Satoshi's Vision. If you think that crypto isn't centralized, please go to Merriam Webster's website and do a little favor to yourself and learn some definitions; it'll do your debate skills a world of good.

But yes I get it! Central banks are evil. Fiat money is a scam. The Illuminati are behind it all and the earth is flat. If there is centralized control, then none of us are free. Yes, truly I do get it.

Magical internet money is better than real fake money. But, coins are built based on purpose, and that idea comes from it's founders. If they do not agree, the coin does not get made.

Where can decentralization find it's place in the universe, then? Here's what makes sense; we do actually want to trust the ideas and philosophy behind a good coin project. The separation of powerful centralized control is to take this away from people, and place the control mechanism in the technology. Can we trust a platform over the people that made the platform? We kinda have to, don't we?

Crypto is essentially decentralized by placing trust in the spread of the transaction process and the record-keeping, both of which are terribly flawed in fiat systems. That's a good thing. But, it is man-made technology, and things are either ruled by a central group of coders, developers, founders, or partly by group voting. Whenever people are involved, there is the potential that the entire network process is based on changes that people are not okay with. It happens all the time. 

Here's the good news; we all have options. And, for whatever measures of freedom exist in crypto, variety is a byproduct of freedom, and therefore we have choices; we have a lot of coins to choose from and that is a good thing.

Look at it; despite all of the flaws in human nature, in design, in the first decade of coding coins, we have signs of true decentralization, and that comes from the wonderful open-source nature of this new venture. There truly is decentralization, but it just isn't where you have been looking for it. The true freedom comes from choices, and there are hundreds of valid coins to put your interest and investment into.

Again, this is just a thought piece and it is going to continue. Please understand, I do know what is meant by decentralization and I do understand what is bad about centralization, but my goal is to point out that not all things are as they appear. When you like something, you challenge it in order for it to improve.

I hope you find this a benefit. If so, TIP! :-)

Gordon Freeman Out.

For the funny stuff, go here:

https://www.publish0x.com/crypto-satire-fake-news-ripped-from-the-headlines