Snow Captain on Nostr: I'd like to philosophize for just a moment: It seems to me that much of the ...

I'd like to philosophize for just a moment:

It seems to me that much of the cryptocurrency and privacy space is terrified of "centralization" and champions things solely because they claim to "improve decentralization". I think centralization is not a de-facto "bad thing", and it can and often *is* a good thing: improving performance, improving stability, improving accountability, improving consistency, etc. Of course, we all know the pitfalls and dangers of centralization, which is why this understandable fear and avoidance has arisen. My perspective on this craze of "decentralize everything" is that the ethos of decentralization is *not* about destroying centralization and centralized services, but in designing and building in, from the ground up, the ability to *choose which centralized (or decentralized) services one wants to use and support*. Twitter is fiat centralized because I can't use *any* of their service without their cooperation. NOSTR is decentralized because I can still use it and benefit from its features by choosing different centralized relays/providers. In conclusion: centralization not "bad", decentralization is about *choosing*, not about destroying/avoiding centralization.