The Death Of Decentralization
Ethereum, The Voyager Platform and The CEFIzation Of Crypto
The other day, we held a Twitter space with The Avalanche and The Voyager Platform communities.
At the end of the conversation, I realized that Decentralization was dead, and The Voyager Platform killed it.
Now, you might argue that Decentralization never actually existed, and you’d be right. As Ahmed Masud of saf.ai put it,
Electricity is everyone’s b*tch.
Those system that run on electricity are centralized because electricity is centralized.
But that’s a bold claim - The Death Of Decentralization. Let’s walk this back.
Compromising Your Fighter
Have you ever played a fighting game where you can customize your character?
In boxing games, for example, you can usually choose a compromise between:
Power
Speed
Stamina
Have you ever heard of the phrase, “Styles make fights”?
The reason that styles make fights is because power doesn’t always trump speed. Power without stamina is a minute man. Stamina without Speed is an anti-fragile sitting duck. You get the idea.
The point is, in life, as in video games,
There are no solutions, only trade-offs. - Thomas Sowell
But again, what does this have to do with the Death of Decentralization? Well, Decentralization at best is a commitment; a commitment to ensuring that everyone who wants to use the network can use the network without asking anyone’s permission. Today, Decentralization is Dead, and I’ll use Ethereum 1.9 and Voyager Platform to explain exactly why.
Why Hasn’t Ethereum Migrated To Ethereum 2.0?
Ethereum hasn’t migrated to Ethereum 2.0 because in order to move to Ethereum 2.0, they’d have to fundamentally change the way Ethereum fights.
In boxing games, you make a compromise between:
Power
Speed
Stamina
Similarly, every immutable blockchain and directed acyclic graph product - BTC, Ethereum, Hedera Hashgraph, BSV, VGX, Solana, Polygon - has been forced to make a compromise between:
Decentralization of Transactions
Speed of Transactions
Consensus of Transactions
The trick is, just like in boxing games, you can’t have your cake and eat it too. This is actually a well-known mathematical formula expressed as the Trilemma.
Long story short, Ethereum 2.0 requires them to improve transaction speeds by sacrificing proof-of-work for proof-of-stake, which represents a move from decentralization to centralization.
We have a trilemma in project management, too. Triangles are funzzzies.
But don’t take my word for it. 2017 tings deh bout di place yuhnoooozeeeeit:
If this is your first time hearing this, it’s because this trade-off isn’t exactly the most marketable thing in the world, ya know?
Muhfus fin get paid out here feel me? - MatiosTV
And so, whether you’ve realized it or not, every blockchain or directed acyclic graph project on the planet has made a compromise between:
Decentralization of Transactions
Speed of Transactions
Consensus of Transactions
That’s why Ethereum fees are so high. They chose Decentralization and Consensus over Speed of Transactions.
That’s why Hedera Hashgraph can produce so many transactions; they’re centralized.
Now, many blockchain projects like Hedera Hashgraph will tout their migration towards decentralization, but it’s oligarchies all the way down fam; you never read Helmer or what?
Long story short, Ethereum 2.0 requires them to improve transaction speeds by sacrificing proof-of-work for proof-of-stake, which represents a move from decentralization to centralization.
But don’t take my word for it.
OK but you still haven’t explained why Decentralization is dead, and the clock is ticking.
Clock is ticking? Well tick on outta here mf the rest of us are about to dig in to some food right about nyuh.
To review, every blockchain project makes a compromise between
Decentralization
Speed
Consensus
The reason that Voyager Platform is gaining steam is because they’ve addressed the trilemma by sacrificing Decentralization for Speed and Consensus. How?
Let’s understand who, first.
How the Voyager Platform Killed Decentralization
Voyager Platform is run by Steve Ehrlich. His resume is significant because he built the Web2.0 of Trading with E*Trade, which was acquired by Morgan Stanley in 2020.
So after selling E*Trade, Steve decided to build the web3 E*Trade, and called it Voyager Platform. Voyager Platform offers the four critical services required to partake in web3 (which are really the same four critical services to partake in web2):
Buying - how might I buy digital assets?
Holding - how might I secure my digital assets?
Earning - how might I earn aka stake my assets to earn yield?
Transferring - how might I transfer my digital assets to another account?
Notice that they’re not offering decentralization as a service; that’s not what their business is about. Their business is about:
Buying - how might I buy digital assets?
Holding - how might I secure my digital assets?
Earning - how might I earn aka stake my assets to earn yield?
Transferring - how might I transfer my digital assets to another account?
The Voyager Platform is offering a suite of four services to people willing to personally identify themselves. And people are more willing to trust a central party now that we’ve seen how self-custody (see Seth Green) is doomed to play out. Doomed? Maybe not ask nftareworthles on Twitter.
Thanks for playing everyone.
Oh by the way everything I say is a lie nothing is true reality doesn’t exist not financial advice blah blah.
Voyager Referral Code: E6ABC1E70
Distributed is not Decentralized, Einstein.
Uh oh. Looks like Voyager invested in Three Arrows Capital which threw $200M into LUNA.
Why did Voyager borrow half a billion dollars? Why did Voyager find the need to create a credit facility of $485M?
Because they lost a lot of money on Celsius, Celsius being a project that was heavily invested into LUNA, which is a project that used to be a top ten cryptocurrency until it was rugged.
