Just started watching an interview on X between Anthony Pompliano and Adam Back, in the first 5 minutes, there is a nuance I hadn't considered in the decentralisation argument.
DigiCash, an early, pre-Internet monetary system failed primarily because it was centralised. This was an early lesson learned in future attempts to bootstrap a digital currency.
As I like to say, we did all the wrong things before we managed to pull Bitcoin off.
You may like this write up
https://pet3rpan.medium.com/history-of-things-before-bitcoin-cryptocurrency-part-one-e199f02ca380
Centralisation is the reason all the Bitcoin precursors ultimately failed. They worked technically, most of them had proof of concepts, but there was always a pressure point that could be taken out to end the project.
Yeh, I hadn't appreciated how core the drive for decentralisation was, unless Adam is nursing history, which I don't think he is.
My understanding from listening to David Chaum and his critics (co-founders) is that DigiCash failed because he cared more about the principles than the success of DigiCash.
At peak it was even adopted by MicroSoft and a bank, but it was his stubbornness about technical issues that caused it to fail. I've heard him acknowledge that himself.
DigiCash had a few big banks but not yet Microsoft and yes it was partially Chaum who led it to failure.
Ok book on the precursor technology side is this one: https://thegenesisbook.com
Good for an overview and timeline but you’ll want to dig into the projects individually more. Lots lost to dead links now unfortunately
Thanks 🙏
