Thanks for writing this, it clarifies a lot. You're really hitting on a critcal point about stablecoin vulnerabilities. It makes me think how a truely decentralized architecture, rather than just corporate solutions, is essential for global economic stability. Great food for thought!
Indeed. The point is that "truly decentralized" does not exist and is almost certainly not meaningfully achievable. You need to orient around a design goal that is achievable - for example, privacy, robustness, uncensorability, etc.
I think a lot of the time, the real question is agency and fungibility, and highly localized centrality plus obliviousness is actually a better fit in that case.
For example, being exposed to one encryption scheme, one client, one relay, but at the edge of the system. Rather than the de facto state of affairs where you trust one blockchain Foundation that is right at the centre.
Thanks for writing this, it clarifies a lot. You're really hitting on a critcal point about stablecoin vulnerabilities. It makes me think how a truely decentralized architecture, rather than just corporate solutions, is essential for global economic stability. Great food for thought!
Indeed. The point is that "truly decentralized" does not exist and is almost certainly not meaningfully achievable. You need to orient around a design goal that is achievable - for example, privacy, robustness, uncensorability, etc.
I think a lot of the time, the real question is agency and fungibility, and highly localized centrality plus obliviousness is actually a better fit in that case.
For example, being exposed to one encryption scheme, one client, one relay, but at the edge of the system. Rather than the de facto state of affairs where you trust one blockchain Foundation that is right at the centre.