Decentralization is a mega trend and a common goal in the crypto community. However, our knowledge about decentralization seems very little despite being such an important issue!?

When the block size debate arose, it was at first discussed as a technical and later as an economical issue — and to the surprise of today’s observer— of no concern! Since then, things changed. Different philosophical approaches led to a massive split in the community, in spite of being seen as a manageable problem by many. What can be safely concluded from that in order to not waste another year debating?

Neither a technical nor an economical solution can be found to an undefined problem!

f (decentralization) = ??

Halt the block size debate for now! Block size will be easily derived once we know what decentralization is all about.

f’ (decentralization) = block size

How to go ahead?

Define decentralization as a concept in a logical and comprehensive way Make inventory of certain attributes to be seen in the current network topology Discuss logical dependencies and negative/positive feedback Calculate corresponding costs Define a balanced strategy to preserve intended network characteristics Decide on a block size (none, fixed, adaptive,…) to fulfil such strategy

The operating cost of a node vs. the cost of accumulated fees for sending a “sufficient” (tbd) number of transactions for individual use seems to be a good enough indicator for the health (balanced decentralization) of the network!? Exuberant operating costs for nodes as well as too high transaction fees will both have a negative effect on decentralization.

Why is a definition of decentralization even needed?

No where to be found — the word ‘decentralization’ is not mentioned in the Bitcoin white paper.

Finding a common denominator becomes more and more difficult over time. New people bring their own idea(l)s or forget about the cause (original intention) of collaboration.

By the way — this may be an inherent weakness of decentralized systems!?

Utopic attributions redefined Bitcoin (quicker and more substantial) than most people like to admit. Hence, Satoshi’s original concept of a P2P based digital cash evolved at the same speed, the community grew by the number of persons and ideas. Subtle redefinition (e.g. blockchain vs. sound money) what so ever has never been discussed sufficiently and makes agreeing and setting common goals difficult if not impossible up to date.

We like the “fact”, that Bitcoin can be pretty anything to anybody (good marketing!) so much … it even feels like a betrayal to define the underlying network functions — because focusing and limiting is not why we came into the space!? Hence we opt for hesitation and failing instead of being more specific of what we can do and what not. (I acknowledge: there are both technical and economical limits we should respect!)

The utopia of decentralization is about equality

Decentralization as a service can be defined differently according to certain world views. It is disguised by many as a saviour for a vast number of problems society currently faces. Still — it should not be a goal in itself. Values are always ruled by different angles (protagonists and antagonists). Understanding the concept of decentralization comes not without acknowledging the benefits of centralization — in order to find the right balance.

Decentralization is a mega trend, but it’s also a hype.

Huge hopes/hypes almost always come with huge caveat! As we already know, the benefits of decentralization may positively influence:

Distribution of power (political, financial,..)

Access to resources and information

Permissionless innovation

Decision making

Some inherent characteristics

Decisions in decentralized systems have to be made in pseudo-democratic ways and can not be reached without sufficient compromise.

Decentralization in contrast to distribution makes use of some [not closer defined] form of hierarchy.

Decentralization favours stagnation in absence of clear uniting goals. It is more about preserving value(s), than creating new wealth.

What is decentralization (worth)?