Decentralization has become a new hype since the invention of GIT. But I think it is overemphasized. In the end you must decide if that form of organization can really help you to achieve your target. If it is just a technical smoke for programmers to grab power, then you are not better than any previous decision making mechanism, just replace the banks with programmers,
and they might ruin it since lack of financial knowledgeJust like democracy, decentralization is even slower, less efficient and will often end up in deadlock situation because no way to reach consensus. If you want to make quick decisions in chaos, centralized organization is always more effective, given the decision makers have enough expertise.
I think the main flaw of the hype is framing it in a political discourse, a type of discoure thats missing reasons and just affirms a simple opposition, centralization=bad, decentralization=good. It has to be understood as a process, not an either/or choice that can be done, as both are necessary properties of systems. The problem with this kind of thinking when you're building a system is that you don't anticipate centralization, and because the system will generate it in practice its effects will be detrimental to indended goals.
Neither centralization or decentralization are good/bad in itself, it all depends on the purposes we wish to accomplish and the means we have at our disposal. For example, centralization is necessary to provide systems with growth of complexity by unifying functions otherwise dispersed and inefficient, but this produces a fragile order, one that either fails in time or succeeds and becomes decentralized as it creates its own specific infrastructure. If we look at an example from biology, you need cells that centralized functions, before you can have a multiplicity of ecosystems with different lifeforms, but if the centralized cell was more efficient compared to aminoacids in replication, the more complex lifeforms far superior for this function. So the claim that centralization is efficient is true, however always only in short term, and when in time the unity created by centralization becomes decentralized and robust, a new bundle of functions can centralize and create new growth of complexity, etc.
Decentralization makes systems robuster by making them more distributed, but this does not yet imply fairness or anything like that, because for decentralized systems distribution is coincidental and particular, and this means it can be as bad as centralization in an ethical sense.