Can you make a compelling argument for why you would trust a random collection of unverified people on the Internet over someone with a well-known reputation that doesn't include anything bad (aside from being a bit of an arse occasionally, but at least he is honest about that!)?
That's not an argument. You're just naming a game theory concept. A compelling argument would at least explain why and how it applies to this situation.
Ok then, my argument is that decentralisation is a very ancient concept and that game theory exists because people with different world views, interests and goals have to negotiate with each other to survive.
Decentralisation is the process of ensuring there is no SPF and to minimise unbalances in power.
For instance, in my country, decentralisation would mean we would have independent state law (like the US) and that most of our decision making structures aren't physically and politically centred in the nation's capital. In technology, we can take the Linux kernel maintenance process as an example of how decentralisation makes it possible to have China, US and EU companies funding the development process and using the software without (too much) fear.
No, but I am always trying to learn new topics and ever since I got professionally involved in blockchain I have picked up a couple of econ books but I wouldn't falsely represent myself as an econ expert. Why do you ask?
