Posted for - "Urban Libertarian Thought. We talk politics, philosophy and economics of crypto. Join in!"
Did he do it to get things done that couldn't/wouldn't/weren't being done?
I'm sure that's what his excuse was. If you can't build a consensus among your peers (senators, governors, lords, aristocrats, board-members, regional-warlords) then it is tempting to short-circuit consensus building (abandon faith in reason) altogether and consolidate power in your own hands (so you don't have to explain yourself to anyone!)
I am assuming that by your assertions, that after this happened Tron was no more.
No, TRON was not dissolved, control of the chain was centralized. TRON now has a king.
There is much less incentive to dissolve a kingdom you currently have de facto dictatorial power over.
My question is: Is there such a thing a a decentralized blockchain. Does this really exist, or is this a pipe dream?
Bitcoin is a decentralized blockchain, it does not have a king.
Stellar-Lumens is a decentralized blockchain, it does not have a king.
Etherium is sort of a hybrid. Like TRON and Steem, it has an official "foundation" which could theoretically "seize control" at some point.
Ripple is a centralized (private) blockchain. Ripple has a king.
Three reasons for Decentralization
The next question is, why is decentralization useful in the first place? There are generally several arguments raised:
(1) Fault tolerance— decentralized systems are less likely to fail accidentally because they rely on many separate components that are not likely.
(2) Attack resistance— decentralized systems are more expensive to attack and destroy or manipulate because they lack sensitive central points that can be attacked at much lower cost than the economic size of the surrounding system.
(3) Collusion resistance — it is much harder for participants in decentralized systems to collude to act in ways that benefit them at the expense of other participants, whereas the leaderships of corporations and governments collude in ways that benefit themselves but harm less well-coordinated citizens, customers, employees and the general public all the time.
All three arguments are important and valid, but all three arguments lead to some interesting and different conclusions once you start thinking about protocol decisions with the three individual perspectives in mind. Let us try to expand out each of these arguments one by one.
https://medium.com/@VitalikButerin/the-meaning-of-decentralization-a0c92b76a274