> So, in a way, a decentralised system is being built on top of a centralised system.
Is this not still fundamentally a centralized system?
Is this not still fundamentally a centralized system?
It’s like arguing construction is a fundamentally centralised business in your local area because every builders buy their bricks from the same factory. It doesn’t make much sense.
They need to keep money (printed by the fed) with a bank controlled by the fed. If you don’t see why that is a centralized system then not sure there’s much to discuss.
It’s distinct from reserve requirement, which doesn’t force you to store your money with a member of a single organization.
And what about a smart contract that requires participants to make a deposit with the smart contract itself? According to what you're saying such smart contracts are by definition centralised. Am I getting this right?
> 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.
Hmm, no.
> Other banks can create debt, but only with permission (the initial money supply) from the fed.
More like a license. But it's no different than me creating supply by promising you to pay. That's really how it works in the banking world (and why the big guys have an advantage: they have a reputation).
> You'd have to really squint to consider that decentralized.
The current system is still relatively decentralized which is why governments and central banks depends on banks (and love them). Which is also why they want to try their hand at a CBDC (because it removes the role of banks)
Who else can make USD? Banks can create M2 but only as a function about how much M0 the central bank creates
You have demanded six explanations in drive-by form of standard concepts from strangers in the last 24 hours
This is the behavior of flat earthers and anti-vaxxers
I imagine it won't be long before Coinbase, for example, will warn you against transferring to wallets which aren't held by one of the big providers.
These automated exchanges seem to be growing rapidly. At one point last year Uniswap had 77% of Coinbase's trading volume: https://tokenist.com/with-33x-fewer-employees-uniswap-has-77...
Perhaps, but I'm not sure if that answers my question.
Cryptocurrency networks are decentralized on their own, but I'd say the way we generally interact with them is not. It sounds like we agree on this point.
However, whether a decentralized system is accessed through a centralized layer or vice verse, the result is a service that is not fully decentralized. If any entity, such as a bank, third-party banking service provider, cryptocurrency exchange, etc., is involved at any point, that entity effectively has some control over what happens on the associated decentralized system. This results in an at least _partially_ centralized system.