Why is this called DeFi? If a dev can nuke an entire app (intentionally or accidentally) it's not decentralized.
Contrary to the HN zeitgeist, I have a lot of excitment for decentralization medium- to long term. But it seems almost everything that's happening in the DeFi space today is about as decentralized as a traditional client server app with mysql.
Multiple DeFi platforms exist. Some are mostly decentralized, others only use DeFi as a marketing buzzword. Some of these are actually centralized, but it doesn't mean all of them are.
In agreement with GP, Solana and other very centralized networks should have to earn their way into the term DeFi. It's hard to quantify but a network that can be "paused" by few devs and relying on the existence of a registered company clearly don't fit this term.
Yeah. I don't get why bother at all with the blockchain when a simple dB would be even superior, then they can prototype away and migrate to decentralized later, if anyone even wants that. Decentralization shares the "weakest link" property with cyber security: you don't get the benefits of you only do half of it.
This sort of thing is not exclusive to Solana. Ethereum will also join Solana and be another highly centralized PoS network, so I expect more of the same centralization points to apply to Ethereum and many other chains.
As for this issue, just look no further than the DAO hack and see if that has taught crypto anything about so-called decentralization; clearly it hasn't.
