Bitcoin is meaningfully decentralized because miners alone do not decide the fate of Bitcoin - there are also users, businesses, and developers as major actros. The 51%++ actor cannot kill Bitcoin, only cause inconvenience. The worst that could happen is a successful DoS that would force a hard fork to another PoW algorithm.
PS1 The full nodes are actually very well decentralized.
PS2 The physical hash power is skewed towards China, which is not ideal, but it tends to decentralize to US, Canada and to lesser extent other countries. It is improving.
Modern financial markets are Ponzi schemes, and they are much larger than bitcoin.
How did you decide to compare the risk of nuclear holocaust to global warming? Anecdotally, I'd rather see temperatures rise over time and have a chance to adjust for it rather than die in a nuclear blast or issues immediately after.
People really have trouble understanding run-off events. You do realize that global temperature increase will not be linear? A slight increase in temperature melts ice that previously trapped plenty of CO2, which will increase the green house effect, increasing temperatures, and here is your feed back loop.
No. True decentralization requires proof of person. Proof of work, stake, capacity, etc. all make it possible for a single person to buy their way into higher voting power.
You are right... I think it might be unsolvable. Nothing stops two people from conspiring to vote in the same direction.
Either party A and B decide (off-network) to vote together, or party A pays party B to vote in the same direction. I don't see a way to solve the problem. Crypto is next-generation wealth redistribution technology, but it is likely that "true decentralization" is a utopia. At the end of the day, people are gonna listen to their family and friends before anyone else, hence vote polarization and pockets of centralization.
