- Actually, here in the crypto business we can't deny that there are still many people who enjoy decentralized exchanges, maybe most of the centralized ones who entered cryptocurrency have just gotten used to it.
But if we look at both of them, they have the same pros and cons, in short they also have a big difference when it comes to its features. There is Cex without DEX and vice versa also with DEX of course.
Topic: Does People Really Care About Decentralization? - page 2. (Read 787 times)
Actually when looking at it as a whole for myself personally, I care quite a lot about decentralization but not all that is done must always be decentralized because in other cases I also still need a centralized system.
Actually it depends on which perspective we see, I think as long as it is centralized it is still better from one aspect then it can be done but on the other hand from another perspective when decentralization is better then the choice means there. I'm not going to be naive about this because as long as I still have an advantage for myself in both then I'll use it because indeed we live, of course we have to find the easiest way to deal with it.
For some, this is a matter of habit, for some it is convenience, but if you remove one thing now, then many will lose their usual comfort. It seems to me that people are not very worried about decentralization, because it is important for them to shift their responsibility to someone else, let banks be responsible for their money, the state is responsible for their pension, this is convenient because you can always find the culprit if something goes wrong. And this is not their fault, they were just taught like that from childhood, and it seems convenient to them.Actually it depends on which perspective we see, I think as long as it is centralized it is still better from one aspect then it can be done but on the other hand from another perspective when decentralization is better then the choice means there. I'm not going to be naive about this because as long as I still have an advantage for myself in both then I'll use it because indeed we live, of course we have to find the easiest way to deal with it.
We live where the rules regarding decentralization are still being developed and of course as long as this is still happening, centralization is still something that is indeed quite important. Even though we don't believe in it because it is indeed considered as one that is indeed deviant when it comes to financial freedom, things like this still cannot be simply dismissed.
If you think of it, decentralization also has pros and cons which it would be hard to adapt in real world. We all know the good benefits of controlling your funds and have freedom to do your will for your funds, however centralization is still a must as it gives us security and assurance. Since decentralization are also more on fraud, scam and criminal activities that may cause chaos in the economy soon. That's why it's the centralization job to maintain the peaceful economy for their people.
Actually when looking at it as a whole for myself personally, I care quite a lot about decentralization but not all that is done must always be decentralized because in other cases I also still need a centralized system.
Actually it depends on which perspective we see, I think as long as it is centralized it is still better from one aspect then it can be done but on the other hand from another perspective when decentralization is better then the choice means there. I'm not going to be naive about this because as long as I still have an advantage for myself in both then I'll use it because indeed we live, of course we have to find the easiest way to deal with it.
For some, this is a matter of habit, for some it is convenience, but if you remove one thing now, then many will lose their usual comfort. It seems to me that people are not very worried about decentralization, because it is important for them to shift their responsibility to someone else, let banks be responsible for their money, the state is responsible for their pension, this is convenient because you can always find the culprit if something goes wrong. And this is not their fault, they were just taught like that from childhood, and it seems convenient to them.Actually it depends on which perspective we see, I think as long as it is centralized it is still better from one aspect then it can be done but on the other hand from another perspective when decentralization is better then the choice means there. I'm not going to be naive about this because as long as I still have an advantage for myself in both then I'll use it because indeed we live, of course we have to find the easiest way to deal with it.
We live where the rules regarding decentralization are still being developed and of course as long as this is still happening, centralization is still something that is indeed quite important. Even though we don't believe in it because it is indeed considered as one that is indeed deviant when it comes to financial freedom, things like this still cannot be simply dismissed.
Actually when looking at it as a whole for myself personally, I care quite a lot about decentralization but not all that is done must always be decentralized because in other cases I also still need a centralized system.
Actually it depends on which perspective we see, I think as long as it is centralized it is still better from one aspect then it can be done but on the other hand from another perspective when decentralization is better then the choice means there. I'm not going to be naive about this because as long as I still have an advantage for myself in both then I'll use it because indeed we live, of course we have to find the easiest way to deal with it.
For some, this is a matter of habit, for some it is convenience, but if you remove one thing now, then many will lose their usual comfort. It seems to me that people are not very worried about decentralization, because it is important for them to shift their responsibility to someone else, let banks be responsible for their money, the state is responsible for their pension, this is convenient because you can always find the culprit if something goes wrong. And this is not their fault, they were just taught like that from childhood, and it seems convenient to them.Actually it depends on which perspective we see, I think as long as it is centralized it is still better from one aspect then it can be done but on the other hand from another perspective when decentralization is better then the choice means there. I'm not going to be naive about this because as long as I still have an advantage for myself in both then I'll use it because indeed we live, of course we have to find the easiest way to deal with it.
It is important or not?, the truth is that decentralized systems are very important. Some features that are not available in centralized systems, such as transparency, security, and full control over personal data, are aspects that can be emphasized on decentralized platforms.
However, why are centralized platforms superior in some sectors? Because their teams and developers know what users need.
Large Marketing Budget and Advertising
We know that centralized platforms have a large budget for marketing and advertising needs, so they are able to attract a wider audience. Unlike decentralized systems, which seem to have a limited budget.
Better UX
Centralized platforms mostly provide a better user experience compared to decentralized platforms. We all would prefer a platform with many features, interrelated services, short page loading speed, easy accessibility, and so on.
Example :
Network and User Management
This is a strategy of centralized platforms that makes their services more reliable, due to the management of a large user base. Whenever there are many users, new users will come because this is included in the network effect. A large number of users can certainly increase the value of the related platform. And this is closely related to user trust.
This is my opinion without taking sides between centralized and decentralized platforms.
However, why are centralized platforms superior in some sectors? Because their teams and developers know what users need.
Large Marketing Budget and Advertising
We know that centralized platforms have a large budget for marketing and advertising needs, so they are able to attract a wider audience. Unlike decentralized systems, which seem to have a limited budget.
Better UX
Centralized platforms mostly provide a better user experience compared to decentralized platforms. We all would prefer a platform with many features, interrelated services, short page loading speed, easy accessibility, and so on.
Example :
Look, Binance offers Futures trading, options, leveraged tokens, swap farming, DeFi Stacking, Liquidity Farming, Launchpad. There are so many options out there to try, it looks like a casino with lots of exciting games. Decentralized exchages can't offer such a diversity.
Network and User Management
This is a strategy of centralized platforms that makes their services more reliable, due to the management of a large user base. Whenever there are many users, new users will come because this is included in the network effect. A large number of users can certainly increase the value of the related platform. And this is closely related to user trust.
This is my opinion without taking sides between centralized and decentralized platforms.
Actually when looking at it as a whole for myself personally, I care quite a lot about decentralization but not all that is done must always be decentralized because in other cases I also still need a centralized system.
Actually it depends on which perspective we see, I think as long as it is centralized it is still better from one aspect then it can be done but on the other hand from another perspective when decentralization is better then the choice means there. I'm not going to be naive about this because as long as I still have an advantage for myself in both then I'll use it because indeed we live, of course we have to find the easiest way to deal with it.
For some, this is a matter of habit, for some it is convenience, but if you remove one thing now, then many will lose their usual comfort. It seems to me that people are not very worried about decentralization, because it is important for them to shift their responsibility to someone else, let banks be responsible for their money, the state is responsible for their pension, this is convenient because you can always find the culprit if something goes wrong. And this is not their fault, they were just taught like that from childhood, and it seems convenient to them. Actually it depends on which perspective we see, I think as long as it is centralized it is still better from one aspect then it can be done but on the other hand from another perspective when decentralization is better then the choice means there. I'm not going to be naive about this because as long as I still have an advantage for myself in both then I'll use it because indeed we live, of course we have to find the easiest way to deal with it.
In my point of view in some situation decentralization really matters, decentralization can also be important from a legal point of view, especially in the United states. Bitcoin and Ethereum are largely exepmt from regulatory pressure because they're decentralized and not controlled by any one person and in another situations it's just not that important. Everyone can choose which blockchains they use, and weather they want to pay higher transaction fees to crypto cryptocurrencies.
Decentralised had played huge role in the history of bitcoin a lot.Because bitcoin is decentralised crypto currency,the creator of the bitcoin doesn’t have a control over the bitcoin price.As we know Ethereum is the centralised cryptocurrency,the owner of Eth had control over the entire price of Ethereum.This decentralised system had made the bitcoin top the crypto currency in the market,So traders can inverse in the decentralised currency to earn more profit at any time.The decentralised doesn’t allow us to find the coin which send wrong address because of it’s decentralised behaviour.
Decentralisation is really a good technology for storing data, it has all the benefits you describe. But in practical use its benefits are often overestimated. First, storage of so much data copies in so many computers leads to problems with overlaying the data. Mining facilities possess enough resources to compute, while internet communications don't. This leads to continuous fixing of forks, and at some moment the overall system can fail in unifying the whole worldwide data. Second thing is that it has tendency to centralise through seemingly decentralised association of main holders, whose collective interest is to hold people under control via the money they collected. We can see the same thing with USD and other fiats: main capital holders are also a problem, not only the printing site. However, no possibility to emit money from a centralised organisation is a great step towards fair currency dynamics even if it doesn't solve the problem of capital holders. IMHO, benefits of decentralised currencies overrun their drawbacks, but in order to build up fair economy there should be ways to decentralise not only emission and support (mining), but also capital distribution.
Decentralised had played huge role in the history of bitcoin a lot.Because bitcoin is decentralised crypto currency,the creator of the bitcoin doesn’t have a control over the bitcoin price.As we know Ethereum is the centralised cryptocurrency,the owner of Eth had control over the entire price of Ethereum.This decentralised system had made the bitcoin top the crypto currency in the market,So traders can inverse in the decentralised currency to earn more profit at any time.The decentralised doesn’t allow us to find the coin which send wrong address because of it’s decentralised behaviour.
Actually when looking at it as a whole for myself personally, I care quite a lot about decentralization but not all that is done must always be decentralized because in other cases I also still need a centralized system.
Actually it depends on which perspective we see, I think as long as it is centralized it is still better from one aspect then it can be done but on the other hand from another perspective when decentralization is better then the choice means there. I'm not going to be naive about this because as long as I still have an advantage for myself in both then I'll use it because indeed we live, of course we have to find the easiest way to deal with it.
Actually it depends on which perspective we see, I think as long as it is centralized it is still better from one aspect then it can be done but on the other hand from another perspective when decentralization is better then the choice means there. I'm not going to be naive about this because as long as I still have an advantage for myself in both then I'll use it because indeed we live, of course we have to find the easiest way to deal with it.
internet users are not conscious of the information they share about themselves even on social media. they do have school IDs and driver's licenses somehow on their facebook making them not anonymous.
anonymous is a plus but i think not being anonymous is not what decentralization is. it's about no one controlling and collecting data from a decentralized platform, especially in finances.
The only people I have seen so far that care about decentralization are those who receive payments of make heavy transaction use the system. The tax that would be incurred can not compare to that of a centralized exchange, and anonymity isn't guaranteed after all. So why even bother.
Although the risk involved is more for a decentralized system because if your funds is lost due to wrong wallet address or scammers get ahold of such an address, it can hardly be tracked down.
We also have the issue of market volatility affecting a decentralized system which is unlike that of a centralized system with steady rates.
It finally boils down to individual preference or mode of earning.
Although the risk involved is more for a decentralized system because if your funds is lost due to wrong wallet address or scammers get ahold of such an address, it can hardly be tracked down.
We also have the issue of market volatility affecting a decentralized system which is unlike that of a centralized system with steady rates.
It finally boils down to individual preference or mode of earning.
For web decentral is a bad idea if your Userbase comes from one country. Most websites work that way.
Ok for the million of eBays sure it could work.
Ok for the million of eBays sure it could work.
I think many people don't care about the idea of decentralization, this is because people will be busy with work or focused on making money, especially if they know the risks of decentralization which can crash money, centralization will of course guarantee that our calculations or estimates of money are more accurate.
I recently read, an article about WEB 2.5 a conceptual term used to make a gateway between WEB 2.0's products and services with WEB 3.0's decentralization. But the question that arises here is, Why is there a need for WEB 2.5? Because there was no mass adoption of decentralization, many projects were coming into the market based on WEB3 but most of them failed to get traffic. Why? the reason was difficult for me.
Like, I thought, every new technology takes a lot of time to get mass adoption. For example, If we Observe BTC, then it took almost 14 years to get globular adoption but still I think it's not that mass. (maybe I would be wrong but that's the way of perception of every mindset). So maybe Web3 will also take time. I know many decentralized swaps and exchanges are in the market like Uniswap and Aave, which has great traffic and adoption but I am talking about other social media, games, and educational projects facing adoption. Like DeFi, which is one of the use cases of Web3.
Why do i think that people did not care about decentralization?
According to Worldometers, there are around 8 billion of the population throughout the world (not official) and out of which, 5.16 billion are using the Internet, and from that 5.16 billion, 4.76 billion of internet users are using Social media platform. (According to Statista)
As we all know, Social media platforms are centralized ones, like Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram, and Tik Tok, etc. If we really want to remain anonymous by leveraging the features of Web3 then why are we using these centralized platforms? Maybe we are so dependent and addicted to these. Maybe due to mass adoption of it, because where there are more people there is more business and money too then why making effort to shift to another (easily)? The same scenario goes for crypto as well. Like, in crypto there is more trading volume on centralized exchanges while less on decentralized ones. Why? due to less adoption and knowledge may be due to less trust also.
What are your thoughts on it, like if we really want to remain anonymous and want to get more control of the internet by leveraging Web3 then why we are riding on the boat of Web2? Why are we still sticking to centralized platform?
Like, I thought, every new technology takes a lot of time to get mass adoption. For example, If we Observe BTC, then it took almost 14 years to get globular adoption but still I think it's not that mass. (maybe I would be wrong but that's the way of perception of every mindset). So maybe Web3 will also take time. I know many decentralized swaps and exchanges are in the market like Uniswap and Aave, which has great traffic and adoption but I am talking about other social media, games, and educational projects facing adoption. Like DeFi, which is one of the use cases of Web3.
Why do i think that people did not care about decentralization?
According to Worldometers, there are around 8 billion of the population throughout the world (not official) and out of which, 5.16 billion are using the Internet, and from that 5.16 billion, 4.76 billion of internet users are using Social media platform. (According to Statista)
As we all know, Social media platforms are centralized ones, like Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram, and Tik Tok, etc. If we really want to remain anonymous by leveraging the features of Web3 then why are we using these centralized platforms? Maybe we are so dependent and addicted to these. Maybe due to mass adoption of it, because where there are more people there is more business and money too then why making effort to shift to another (easily)? The same scenario goes for crypto as well. Like, in crypto there is more trading volume on centralized exchanges while less on decentralized ones. Why? due to less adoption and knowledge may be due to less trust also.
What are your thoughts on it, like if we really want to remain anonymous and want to get more control of the internet by leveraging Web3 then why we are riding on the boat of Web2? Why are we still sticking to centralized platform?
The fact is that those who want to have fun on the Internet are the majority.
Many people do not think that we can do everything with the transactions of the world free from intermediaries. They want just watching funny little dogs and cat and playing around in tiktok.
I love dogs and cats too
but as a crypto enthusiast, I want the global financial system to finally move to a new level, thanks to blockchain. Not everyone appreciates decentralization, it will show transparency and immutability of transactions, and this can hinder the business of many intermediaries in the world. Those who are used to making money out of manipulation and the opacity of their affairs.
Like, I thought, every new technology takes a lot of time to get mass adoption. For example, If we Observe BTC, then it took almost 14 years to get globular adoption but still I think it's not that mass. (maybe I would be wrong but that's the way of perception of every mindset)...
It's not as mass as we want it to be... so you are not wrong or right, you (like many of us) are just impatient. But things are looking a lot better than 9 years ago (when I found out about crypto). But it's definitely growing, and in some places of the world that growth is faster... while in countries like mine is things are going pretty slow.
People have gotten used to government power and control over their lives, that's why some people are still waiting for the government to regulate cryptocurrency before they have invested their money, those who are out of crypto investment are bigger than those who are into crypto investment and that is fine, it's only a matter of time anyways, gradually crypto adoption will keep growing pace by pace.
Decentralization in the crypto space belongs to Bitcoin because this is the only digital currency that really approaches decentralization, it is fine and acceptable to say that not everyone will prefer Bitcoin, and for many, it will take a longer time for them to realize how important decentralization can be for humanity.
Decentralization can't be forced.
Decentralization in the crypto space belongs to Bitcoin because this is the only digital currency that really approaches decentralization, it is fine and acceptable to say that not everyone will prefer Bitcoin, and for many, it will take a longer time for them to realize how important decentralization can be for humanity.
Decentralization can't be forced.
As we all know, Social media platforms are centralized ones, like Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram, and Tik Tok, etc. If we really want to remain anonymous by leveraging the features of Web3 then why are we using these centralized platforms?
Just because centralized platforms are been used widely by everybody on the planet doesn't mean we don't want decentralization. The problem here is that just the centralized platforms were the only choices available or they were the most popular and people loves using what's popular and trending and that's why we have centralized apps dominating the social media.
Same thing happened in the market before we're now having decentralized exchange trying to get some volume. If we didn't care about decentralization then we won't be using those decentralized exchanges and application that helps keep us anonymous.
What is an example of that? Exchanges will be the ones who need a third party to make sure they don't scam their users. Most of them have no incentive to go decentralized if they can just pay a fee every now and then to make sure they can continue their services and rake in millions of profits.
We gonna take example of Exchanges no matter what Centralized Exchange have a lot of contribution to a whole crypto adoption. In the other hand bad actor makes Centralized Exchange looks bad that is why we need balance. and Decentralized Exchange arrive.
In other industries take a look at commodity and stock exchange, it always uses Centralized exchange so the government can do regulations and protect the customer.
I recently read, an article about WEB 2.5 a conceptual term used to make a gateway between WEB 2.0's products and services with WEB 3.0's decentralization. But the question that arises here is, Why is there a need for WEB 2.5? Because there was no mass adoption of decentralization, many projects were coming into the market based on WEB3 but most of them failed to get traffic. Why? the reason was difficult for me.
Like, I thought, every new technology takes a lot of time to get mass adoption. For example, If we Observe BTC, then it took almost 14 years to get globular adoption but still I think it's not that mass. (maybe I would be wrong but that's the way of perception of every mindset). So maybe Web3 will also take time. I know many decentralized swaps and exchanges are in the market like Uniswap and Aave, which has great traffic and adoption but I am talking about other social media, games, and educational projects facing adoption. Like DeFi, which is one of the use cases of Web3.
Why do i think that people did not care about decentralization?
According to Worldometers, there are around 8 billion of the population throughout the world (not official) and out of which, 5.16 billion are using the Internet, and from that 5.16 billion, 4.76 billion of internet users are using Social media platform.
-snip-
As we all know, Social media platforms are centralized ones, like Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram, and Tik Tok, etc. If we really want to remain anonymous by leveraging the features of Web3 then why are we using these centralized platforms? Maybe we are so dependent and addicted to these. Maybe due to mass adoption of it, because where there are more people there is more business and money too then why making effort to shift to another (easily)? The same scenario goes for crypto as well. Like, in crypto there is more trading volume on centralized exchanges while less on decentralized ones. Why? due to less adoption and knowledge may be due to less trust also.
What are your thoughts on it, like if we really want to remain anonymous and want to get more control of the internet by leveraging Web3 then why we are riding on the boat of Web2? Why are we still sticking to centralized platform?
You're right, some people do care about decentralization, but they still end up using centralized platforms out of habit or convenience. It's kinda funny how we don't always notice that are giving up decentralization by using these platforms. But in most case, it is because of how easy it is to use those platforms. Web3 and defi stuffs are new to most people. I guess it takes time for everyone to really get the hang of it and switch to decentralized alternatives. As more people become aware and new decentralized options get user-friendly (which lets be honest, is not at all), we'll see a shift towards those tech. But for now, it's all about spreading the word and making people feel comfortable using decentralized methods. Like, I thought, every new technology takes a lot of time to get mass adoption. For example, If we Observe BTC, then it took almost 14 years to get globular adoption but still I think it's not that mass. (maybe I would be wrong but that's the way of perception of every mindset). So maybe Web3 will also take time. I know many decentralized swaps and exchanges are in the market like Uniswap and Aave, which has great traffic and adoption but I am talking about other social media, games, and educational projects facing adoption. Like DeFi, which is one of the use cases of Web3.
Why do i think that people did not care about decentralization?
According to Worldometers, there are around 8 billion of the population throughout the world (not official) and out of which, 5.16 billion are using the Internet, and from that 5.16 billion, 4.76 billion of internet users are using Social media platform.
-snip-
As we all know, Social media platforms are centralized ones, like Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram, and Tik Tok, etc. If we really want to remain anonymous by leveraging the features of Web3 then why are we using these centralized platforms? Maybe we are so dependent and addicted to these. Maybe due to mass adoption of it, because where there are more people there is more business and money too then why making effort to shift to another (easily)? The same scenario goes for crypto as well. Like, in crypto there is more trading volume on centralized exchanges while less on decentralized ones. Why? due to less adoption and knowledge may be due to less trust also.
What are your thoughts on it, like if we really want to remain anonymous and want to get more control of the internet by leveraging Web3 then why we are riding on the boat of Web2? Why are we still sticking to centralized platform?
Jump to: