Weird for some reason his centralized system is kosher, but everyone else's isn't... I am NOT bashing bit-pay.. I think his service rocks... I'm just pointing out that for some reason you endorse that centralized system while saying you don't endorse centralized systems.
Hence the problem I have with the below post... it appears it's not actually a centralized system that bugs you... it's something else that I quite don't get... hopefully you can clarify how running bitcoins though a centralized server is different than running bitcoins though a centralized server.
We don't store people's bitcoins at bit-pay, but we do move them...so, yes, while you do need to trust us, you don't need to trust us with very much at any given time (about 1 day worth of revenues is all we'll have in our system at any given time). With an account based wallet service, you're asking people to trust you for longer periods of time and with potentially a lot more value. I think rather than argue with DeathAndTaxes, we should listen.
In order to be completely decentralized, people will need to install and run their own nodes and such...the software will continue to get easier and make this more feasible for more people...at the same time, no matter how easy it gets, there will always be something you want or need that isn't easy and that takes time. In the case of merchants, there will be those that will want to manage everything themselves...I think they'll mostly be smaller merchants with technical skills, or very large merchants that can afford to hire someone manage the bitcoin aspect of their business. But I think there will also be many small or mid sized merchants that will want the cost efficiency of outsourcing the bitcoin aspects to bit-pay (or btcinch or others that have merchant services in the works). At some point, you have to trust either yourself to manage the bitcoin stuff, or you have to hire someone to do it for you and trust them. You can hire someone directly on your payroll, or utilize a service like bit-pay.