Polkadot: The centralized decentralized ecosystem - a cartel?

[taqtiqa-mark]

@rich

Ostensibly this is about the economic viability of the current incentives and associated slot scarcity (or not) correct?

@rich, not sure if that question, while quoting @brad.olson.587, was actually directed at me. In case it was …

To be fair I think what I was getting at was very clear:

@taqtiqa-mark

@taqtiqa-mark

Why are people trying to develop a decentralized ecosystem via a centralized “choke-point” - Polkadot?

I thought it might be considered click-bait, so I gave some context and justified the “choke-point” claim. Why I’m interested in thinking about Polkadot is irrelevant to the reason why you or others are developing a Parachain, so I left it out.

@rphmeier sought to challenge two observations around the scalability of Parachains (the context):

1. That Polkadot is the choke-point

@rphmeier

I would strongly contend that Polkadot itself is not a chokepoint but that it is rather the acquisition of economic security (i.e. capital at stake) which is a chokepoint.

2. That Relay Chains are the natural unit of development in the context given (scalability)

@rphmeier

Please forgive me for being blunt, but I do think that this approach is fundamentally mistaken in the sense that it doesn’t recognize the primary product of Polkadot, why that product is useful, whether that product is easily replicated, and what users it might find.

From there the conversation went sideways - and down the economic security is scarce/hard rabbit hole.

Every industry and firm faces capital scarcity and technological hurdles/barriers to growth.
But few hold repeated auctions of the same item (after you have to return it to them) - even DeBeers will let you buy/own diamonds.

I posed several questions to @rphmeier. Until then, I think we can consider this as resolved as it will ever be?