The revolution will be decentralised

A response to those who think we should roll over for Libra.

It wasn’t long ago that I wrote about the rise of platforms within our digital world.

In it, I discussed how many have raised concerns (and rightly so) that platforms are centralising ownership of digital assets while simultaneously farming consumers for their data.

Then last week, I came across another piece that made me want to take to my keyboard once more. It was this:

The post, by author Michael K. Spencer, broadly proclaims an end to the “decentralized blockchain tech” gold rush.

Spencer argues that big tech, governments, and venture capitalists (and by proxy, global capitalism) have declared crypto the loser.

The winners of this battle are apparently the duopolies, whose strength is inevitable and unstoppable; super-platforms will now rule the day as an ambivalent populous watches from the sidelines…

Spencer repeatedly states, “This is the world we live in.”

It’s a grim prediction. And I just don’t agree.

Call me an optimist but I’m also employed in the decentralised space, so I truly beg to differ. I don’t think my dApps will fall on dark screens.

So let’s go on a quick journey to dispel some of this fear-mongering.

Is Libra going to kill Bitcoin? And with it, all other digital currencies?

Let’s look at what we know. Yes, Facebook’s digital currency Libra is looming on the horizon. Yes, the impact of this new currency on the crypto-space is one of the hotly debated topics of 2019.

[For example, these articles here, here, and here… all from this month, and that’s just a drop in the bucket.]

But of course people want to talk about the big blue monolith entering crypto - it’s big news.

And maybe for the layman, it is reasonable then to assume that having such a tech giant walk onto the field of crypto would spell disaster for the smaller players…

EXCEPT it won’t. Because by creating Libra, Facebook has shown their true hand to the world.

Libra legitimises digital currencies, as well as the research being performed by the many smaller decentralised cryptocurrencies already in existence.

And make no mistake, research is exactly what the decentralised space is all about right now.

Decentralisation is not about coming out on top, controlling the most resources, or selling expensive ad space. Decentralisation is motivated in solving the power imbalances created by tech giants like Facebook.

Facebook’s swipe at crypto is a calculated attempt to get in front of a situation they know that they can’t control. They can see where the future is going and they’re scared. It’s a move motivated by revenue preservation and I’d call it a big win for digital currencies everywhere.

Will duopolies rule the world?

Another frequent observation is that we have become numb in our world of Coke vs. Pepsi. We somehow inherently know that having a choice is good, but having several choices is a luxury we can no longer afford.

Everywhere we look (Spencer even makes a list), it seems two names have risen to the top and agreed to a division of the resource pie.

But is this actually reality?

I wholeheartedly agree that many industries are worryingly dominated by binary choice.

Perhaps human brains are much better at yes/no decisions. E.g. I like Netflix. I don’t want Android. Etc., etc., etc.

So, yes, in a sense the world is full of duopolies already. But I would argue that this is just how our over-saturated brains consolidate all the information from our interconnected world.

Examine any industry closer and you’ll find it to be filled with multifaceted nuance. When neither option suits your preference, there will usually be a third-party vying for your attention.

Yes, there are usually big players in most markets. Yes, the odds are usually stacked against the newer entries.

But, also yes, people with new ideas are out there, taking on the giants and contributing a surprising amount to the movement of industries everywhere.

So, no.

RIP electric car?

Back in the 2000's (not that long ago), people were up in arms over the death of the electric car. General Motors had controversially ended production of their EV1 electric vehicle.

Would electric vehicles ever see sustained, widespread use? Would the automobile industry ever allow it?

As we now know, the resistance by manufacturers to electric vehicles couldn’t hold and a wide range of electric vehicles now populate the roadways.

I think the electric vehicle stands as an example and also a great metaphor for cryptocurrency.

1996 — The initial electric vehicle sees wide release.

1999 — Big auto pushes back and tries to kill the idea.

2000 — A big manufacturer sort of embraces the idea (Toyota Prius electric hybrid sees worldwide release).

2000’s — Consumer acceptance and understanding grows and demand for electric vehicles grows with it.

2008 — New all-electric vehicles begin to enter the market (Tesla, Nissan, etc).

Facebook’s Libra, being a Prius-like ‘crypto-hybrid’, places us firmly in the middle of this process. Meaning there is still plenty of room for the Tesla’s of crypto to make their mark…

Seems a bit too early to give up on the idea, if you ask me!

And if you don’t believe me, consider this from Bill:

“We always overestimate the change that will occur in the next two years and underestimate the change that will occur in the next ten. Don’t let yourself be lulled into inaction.” - Bill Gates

Could super-platforms overpower the revolution? Not while people still exercise choice….

If there was one Goliath that seemed more likely to take down the decentralised future, my money would be on the super-platforms.

I’ve already written on this topic, so I won’t dwell, but I’d like to readdress a few points.

Super-platforms are an attempt by big tech to consolidate ownership of digital assets and lease out short-term access via subscription models.

Think Netflix.

Many movies to choose from, but without any say over the selection. You might be able to re-watch your favourite sitcom over and over for years, until one day, when it vanishes forever.

Such centralisation of ownership is, indeed, problematic. It takes power directly from the hands of consumers and subjects us to the whims of a corporation driven to maximise profits.

Clearly, the popularity of super-platforms is an indicator that consumers are willing to sell out on a decentralised future.

Right..?

I am not so certain.

I agree that we love our super-platforms. They likely won’t be disappearing anytime soon. And I applaud the people sounding the alarm against the encroachment of them.

However I also believe that we, as consumers, are more intelligent than ever before.

We permit the existence of Facebook… of Netflix… of Spotify, because we understand that we do have a choice.

Every big corporation depends on consumer opinion more than ever — and knows the tide can turn in a heartbeat. Even the duopolies at the top aren’t immune to this effect.

I think consumers intuitively understand this.

So, long live decentralisation!!

Yes, at present centralisation still dominates our day-to-day digital lives and there is inherent utility in it…

But decentralisation provides a comforting, opposing force.

It’s the rebel alliance.

It is a lifeboat in rough waters.

Decentralisation give us a choice.

Anything else removes that choice, it throws in the towel; it abandons all hope.

And we’re far from that.

In fact, at Sylo, we’ve kicked off the next step in the decentralised revolution!!

Yesterday we released the fully decentralised Sylo app into the Google Play and Apple App stores.

Go in and give it a whirl.

You’ll soon see why I’m sure that the future is not bleak — but bright.

—

Got a question or comment for Paul or another member of Team Sylo?

Drop us a line on Twitter now :)