Nick Szabo  🔑

@NickSzabo4 hm no, you can replace all those with a centralised network of computers. decentralisation only emerges given a certain config

@mwilcox Quite not. Centralization of the computers without the decentralization of "human blockchain" checking each others' work = Mt. Gox.

@mwilcox Visa, Wall St., etc. all traditionally work on the labor-intensive "human blockchain" model of cross-checking bureaucrats.

@mwilcox In other words, trusted third parties are security holes: http://szabo.best.vwh.net/ttps.html 

@NickSzabo4 would you say that a (highly decentralised) PoS network would require those things?

@mwilcox Proof-of-anything still requires great messaging redundancy (would need full broadcast from every node for provable security).

@flempan6151 It's a job-savings program for that army at the expense of almost all the benefits one can get from the blockchain.

@flempan6151 Besides the massive cost difference, the main benefit lost by "centralized blockchain" (oxymoron) is seamless global operation.

@NickSzabo4 bitcoin only gets rid of the first at best. Ethereum however... :)

@jeffscottward It substitutes for all of them wrt raw payments & some related smart payments. Ethereum may substitute wrt much more.

@NickSzabo4 you mean will be or might be..as of now that sounds a bit if fantasy

@Jensign It's reality: there are no accountants or lawyers employed to maintain integrity of Bitcoin txs.

@NickSzabo4 So decentralization may be not not all about full node counts, even if it is, the best way to bring more decentralization ...

@orionwl @NickSzabo4 That's just not possible for average users, they'd kill themselves rather than running a node. The who should run?