The way I understand it, crypto-currencies are distributed in the technical sense, not in the democratic sense.
What I mean is that the blockchain is spread out over many nodes, doesn't reside on a central server and is not directly controlled by a centralized authority.
This is still true of most crypto-currencies, even ones with shortcomings (I read your article on Bitcoin).
I am still excited about the decentralized nature of crypto!
Well you need to have both, otherwise what is the point.
What is the point in having many nodes if the owners of the nodes are all in an echochamber of lies?
There has to be political decentralization too.
The democracy of crypto is that everyone has the opportunity to use it. Not everyone has to have a say in how it works.
That's one of the reasons I like "proof of stake" cryptos. You have a larger voice if you are more invested in the platform. Why should someone who just arrived and has almost nothing invested have the same voice as someone who has been active in the community for a while and has a good amount of value invested in the platform?
I like your writing. It's good to ask questions and challenge assumptions.
True, but if you invest a lot in a coin you already have power over it's price.
If the devs don't play as investors want, they can just cashout and crash the price.