They are there and they very obviously don't apply, I mean when the last time anyone gave a shit about the law before downloading Bitcoin core or uTorrent... The only reason you use this stuff is because you simply decided to not ask for permissions. And they work.
If your system cannot do that, just don't bother with the decentralisation circus.
You do know that using BitTorrent to download illegal content in many countries is illegal and ends up in big fines etc, right?
Yet there are countless seeders in every country... because it is actually decentralised enough that enforcement is futile.
If you can't reach that point, there is really no point in decentralisation whatsoever, if everything you do is legal and will always be legal, decentralisation is net negative
>if everything you do is legal and will always be legal, decentralisation is net negative
why? surely there are practical benefits other than "it's easier to break the law"?
It is not "break the law" it is "don't care what is the law" ... And if you do care, then no there are no benefits to decentralisation, only costs. That's why there is not a single decentralised system at scale that is not made exactly to be apolitical.
There are benefits for distribution (resiliency) but that is an entire different definition of distribution... It remains organisationally centralised and only distributed to the bare minimum.
Asking permission is seeking denial.
