network with the degree of distribution of consensus on the composition of a block in an unpermissioned crypto-network.
In other articles I have argued that the word “decentralized”, and its corresponding acronym DLT, have been used inappropriately in both cases.
When the word de-centralization is used to indicate the sharing of authority by an owner, is it
really solving the problem of control? In other words, if a subsidiary of Facebook is one of the players controlling the Libra network, does this make the network less subject to the control by one or a majority of its members?
In a private, permissioned network, where users trust their providers, “less centralization” may be all that is required. Financial institutions have been interacting under this principle since their inception and their users may see ‘a bit less centralization’ as substantial progress.
However, the Libra announcement will not make an impression on those cryptocurrency users that are looking for a “trustless” alternative to the traditional banking system. That is, a cryptonetwork that does not require trusting intermediate entities. This market, currently consisting of about 100 million users, may net be the target of Libra, but it is almost doubling every year and it may dramatically increase if a scalable, second generation public crypto network fulfilling the trustless requirements will seize the market.
We have to note that these cryptocurrency users are still without a home-base. While initially Bitcoin seemed to provide a means for every user to directly interact with any other user (peer-to-peer), the network quickly morphed in a system where users need to trust
intermediaries for composing blocks and need to trust third parties for holding their wallets.
Later players, from Ethereum to EOS, have used the word de-centralization to indicate that in an un-permissioned network there is a fair system for deciding which node will compose and impose the block on every other node (a leader-based consensus). This level of decentralization is also very unsatisfactory, as it still requires intermediaries, such as miners, validators or producers.
Thus, we cannot really blame Libra for decentralizing control to a limited extent in a