Real decentralization then is when three Big Mining companies operating in an authoritarian country control over half the hash power? Or does it help to add three more big mining pools where all the members of each pool are doing is working to find hash codes for the one operator who gets to decide what software gets run? There are far fewer people choosing that software in Bitcoin than there are in BitShares and in BitShares they are chosen by the shareholders based on their earned reputations - not based on self-appointed ownership of processing power. You can vote out a bad node in BitShares and it has to rebuild its reputation to play again - almost impossible. Bitcoin can't stop a bad actor from hashing with their hash power forever.
Bitcoin is completely coercible by compromising just a few people. Power is forced to be distributed uniformly among BitShare's elected witnesses. Find them and coerce them and new witnesses pop up elsewhere automagically. Try that in Bitcoin.
For Bitcoin we have #UASF - the users, as a community, forced the miners to enable SegWit. It shows who really controls Bitcoin.
Good improvement, which proves we were right with DPOS.
Now, when will bitcoin start to catch up in performance?
Answer: When we remove the miners for them.
LN looks promissing but we will see :)
Worth reading this medium article re:LN:
Mathematical Proof That the Lightning Network Cannot Be a Decentralized Bitcoin Scaling Solution
there's so much misinformation that it's best to test it in real environment and see the results.
AFAIK It's not in production yet, time will tell.. it may drive everyone towards BTC-U ;D