Ironically the people pushing for Web3 are mostly those that do not understand why decentralisation is key^1. The projects pushed by these individuals and corporations are largely very centralised.
Look at the Solana fiasco a while back where the network went down and required a coordinated restart.
Another centralising power in these "smart" blockchains are the stable coin issuers. In the event of a hard fork^2 Tether and USDC essentially have the power to decide single-handedly decide which chain ends up being the correct one. Why? Because they can't support two chains, the value of the tokens would be split in half. So, for example. Let's say Tether decides that Eth 2.0 is not something they would like to support, they would simply say "We will not redeem any coins on Eth 2.0" and that would be it. The value of the DeFi on that chain would evaporate instantly and no one would use it. The fact that almost no-one talks about this is pretty scary.
^1 Only Bitcoin is actually sufficiently decentralised to withstand large take-over attempts and politics, IMO.
^2 Ethereum hard forks every 6 months by design, by the way
> Only Bitcoin is actually sufficiently decentralised to withstand large take-over attempts and politics, IMO.
This is just a meme. If large blockers in the blocksize wars had won, the statement would still be true. Today, you cannot go against Blockstream's capture of bitcoin's IP (whatever happens will happen with the direction of /r/bitcoin, bitcointalk, @bitcoin, bitcoin.org, and bitcoin github owners).
With complete censorship both bitcoin subreddit and bitcointalk site stopped and advocacy of increase in blocksize. I hardly consider this as 'defending a take-over attempts', but if you think that was a fair action then sure bitcoin is 'decentralized' enoguh to withstand take-over attempts and politics, whatever.
The only real decentralisation is the one constituted of 8 billion brains and 8 billions bodies which are all roughly the the same size and strength
All the other types of decentralisation are marketed to you by early adopters who want you to pump their coin in order for their asset to increase in price
They are ironically using the concept of decentralisation to centralise wealth and power in their hands
Of course even if with their dishonest intent they can never quite beat the real decentralisation provided by nature which makes it so that even the most powerful “human” ever (Jesus Christ) only has an extremely limited amount of power over the totality of humanity.
Matter of fact “he” only gets to be the spokesman of otherwise already popular concepts such as compassion , love and the reward for those who practice them
Look at the Solana fiasco a while back where the network went down and required a coordinated restart.
Another centralising power in these "smart" blockchains are the stable coin issuers. In the event of a hard fork^2 Tether and USDC essentially have the power to decide single-handedly decide which chain ends up being the correct one. Why? Because they can't support two chains, the value of the tokens would be split in half. So, for example. Let's say Tether decides that Eth 2.0 is not something they would like to support, they would simply say "We will not redeem any coins on Eth 2.0" and that would be it. The value of the DeFi on that chain would evaporate instantly and no one would use it. The fact that almost no-one talks about this is pretty scary.
^1 Only Bitcoin is actually sufficiently decentralised to withstand large take-over attempts and politics, IMO.
^2 Ethereum hard forks every 6 months by design, by the way