Good read, AND we are mentioned
The real questions are do we want to have a central blockchain? Do we want developers, businesses in New York and Silicon Valley, to centralize power around that central blockchain?
I think with Bitcoin as it is now it promotes "big blockchain". Do we want to do this or do we want decentralization on the level of blockchains as well?
My stance on this is that blockchains should compete. If a blockchain is really a brilliant design and great at something then power should centralize around innovation. If a blockchain isn't really innovating and the design is obsolete then power should be allowed to flow away without any sort of lock ins or religious propaganda.
Bitcoin is not a religion, at least not for me.
Yeah I catch myself worrying more about stuff like that. I see a lot of developments that look an awful lot like what has lead to the current problematic monopolistic relics of the past. I'm trying to be watchful for the small signs that when overlooked will turn the things we are building into the monstrosities of the future. But I admit it can be difficult to make the right decisions when feeling pressured by short term personal problems or gains.
For example making decisions out of a perceived position of weakness that are not the best ones and then sugarcoat those concessions with platitudes like network effect and attempts to prevent fragmentation. Considering that we are trying to build decentralized systems, the last one is an especially odd one, but still it pops up in a lot of places to try and pull developments in a certain direction or "sphere of influence".
There seem to be bigger challenges to be conquered that are not just technological. The concepts of distributed systems, seem to either not click with a lot of people, or the unwillingness of losing control is more powerful than the concept of working for the common good.