has gotten a certain level of centralization, that was not forseen, as far as I know.
Pareto Principle more or less seems to strike always in everything humans (and nature) do, an unsolved problem. Re-decentralization can happen (when the arms race will require miners to make use of waste heat, which is impossible for a large-scale facility). So it's all a very dynamic and thus much more resilient process. Much more resilient and adaptive than a strict, limited number of identifiable master nodes, which will eventually fall under tight regulations.
Bitcoin being able to scale enough
Again, Lightning Network.
It is dynamic. And there are always unexpected challenges along the way, that is what gives a stimulus to innovate, to evolve. As can be seen here at Steem(It) too.
And I'm aware of the scale argument through a fiber glass network, and maybe allready sooner than many belief possible: quantum computing. Or data storage on a quantum scale. Than that would change things quite a lot. And also my perspective of current affairs, also a good reason to start posting some more.
For me it is a difference in opinion, I'm okay with that. And I do like Steem on Graphene, I love that it is Blogging on a Blockchain. Do get your arguments and I respect them. My point of view differs from yours currently, and if I'm proven wrong, I will be the first to admit it.
And you can call me back on that, it's locked in the blockchain for everyone to witness. ;-)
Yes, you don't respond to my arguments much anymore.
:)For the record, actually I see great potential for Steemit. It seems to be actively and continuously improved, the front-end is smooth and works well, color me impressed. For potential big investors (much bigger than today's steem whales) the technology behind it won't matter much. They don't care if or how much steemit is centralized. They only see the size of the community and the new innovations it brings for monetization.
Thanks for the discussion. ;-)
And yes, we agree on SteemIt! :-)
Steem On!