Mining has not centralized, it has decentralized over time. Mining *pools* have centralized (though on the surface it appears more distributed, but it isn’t unfortunately) but this is a networking problem, not a PoW problem.

Again, the problem is fundamental, not surface layer. PoS consensus cannot come with a “stake” that is determined by the outcome of that very same consensus. And PoS also has a fundamental centralizing force because there is no competition against stakers. You cannot remove or compete against their staking share unless *they* sell their coins. So the wealthiest stakers will always grow their portion faster than everyone else in the network. It centralizes far, far worse and more systemically. PoW does still just have the natural, physical economies of scale that make decentralization an uphill battle, but that’s not something inherent to PoW operation specifically.

I don’t know anything about that random token, but I’d bet very confidently that they have centralized checkpoints as part of consensus. Every other PoS model has it for obvious reasons.

Simply put, there’s no comparison here. PoW isn’t perfect or without challenges, but PoS isn’t even in the running. It’s centralized by default and can’t reach consensus in a decentralized fashion in the case of a network failure, communication lapse, or split in the network of any serious depth. Like I said, it’s the facade of decentralization that exists only at the very tip of the chain.

#Bitcoin can reach independent, untrusted consensus from block 100 (or block 1 even) if necessary without ANY coordination simply by verifying the PoW. No PoS can expect to even go 100 blocks back from right now without huge problems, or possibly even hitting signed checkpoints from a centralized trusted source, let alone years back or all the way back to its first day of operation.