Measuring centralization can be an informative academic exercise, but IMO the only way to know if a network is sufficiently decentralized is to attack it. If it can withstand attacks from nation states, it's sufficiently decentralized.
-
This is why regulators determining degrees of "decentralization" is so damn dangerous.
As valuable as decentralization may be for specifying laws, for example to define securities, the legal definitions need not and probably will not have much of anything to do with what kinds of decentralization best minimize trust.
-
-
I'm worried about using "decentralization" as a metric to define *anything*. The Howey test doesn't have a decentralization factor, though it does specify a "common enterprise" component.
-
Indeed, metrics radically oversimplify the computer science and practical issues of trust minimization.
-
Not everything that matters can be measured, and not everything that can be measured matters. Decentralization matters, for many things, but it is not easily or reliably measured.
-
Goodhart's law here may apply
-
Correct! Just learned that it had a name and now it's indispensable. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law …
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Does decentralization today mean decentralized tomorrow???
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
As it’s all about distinguishing currency and security, it’s funny to also consider the degree of centralisation of conventional fiat-currency. Consider the Turkish Lira and it’s rate-dependency on the issuing government’s monetary, fiscal and judicial policy and geo-politics.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.