Bitcoins with blockchains – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Block_chain_%28database%29 – are supposed to be decentralised technologies.
However, I wonder how decentralised the technology actually is..
In terms of having potentially equal nodes throughout its network: would node X with a big computer and ability to process more than others be an equal?
More importantly, in my view is the question of the network protocol’s own centrality within like minded networks. This perhaps is a question of conceptual decentralisation – however, it seems interesting because if the network Is the ce3ntre of a decentralised nodes with it, then we essentially get a state like model that is in fact an algorithm.
In sense, is it not a substitution of human exchange protocols with algorithmical protocols which form, in and of themselves, a centralised object?
Am using the state analogy here because in the bitcoin oriented environments, focus is indeed upon how to replace state linked operations with blockchain technology. There are some who envision a sort of stateless anarchy that is happily controlled by an algorithm.
Am not suggesting there is something inherently “wrong” with a controlling algorithm. Sure it has its drawbacks like other operators have theirs, however this might belong to a different discussion.
Here I’d like to point only that the singularity of having a state, or an algorithmic protocol, or any other centralised controlling or defining element – makes the decentralisation limited within itself. Hence considering this technology on a universal scale, ie implementable for all circumstances and for all – seems perhaps out of step.