> Can you explain why the ledger being run by ~27 different entities is NOT decentralized?

27 entities? Not decentralized.

$10M fee to run a node? Not decentralized.

Anyone can run a node from their computer? Decentralized.

Blockchain validity is determined by mass consensus? Decentralized.

51% of the hash power is considered an attack rather than a feature of the system? Decentralized.

Edit: Removed item about forking. That's probably more about decentralized governance than decentralized currency.

You may be confusing permissionlessness with decentralisation.

A system can be decentralised and permissioned at the same time.

Fine, add that to my spec sheet above:

Need to ask an authority for permission to do something within the system? Not decentralized.

No, the white paper explicitly states that plan to phase this out.

Fine, add that to my spec sheet above:

Need to start your system with requirements about asking permissions? Not decentralized.

At some point, we need to recognize that playing games with the system so that Marketing can use the word "decentralized" does not change the meaning of the word.

or accept the fact that there is a spectrum of decentralization. It's not binary.

In other contexts "split up between a group of folks" (that may be open to newcomers or not) is sometimes called "federated", while "everybody has (theoretically) a voice in the outcome" would be "decentralized".

In bitcoin, everybody has a chance to voice their opinion on what the ledger should look like (nevermind how miniscule it is these days given warehouses full of ASIC miners). Libra has 27 designated peers, and somebody in that group gets to decide about number 28 (and, potentially, about the other 26).

And those ASIC miners serve a purpose, it becomes much harder for a state sponsored actor to develop more efficient mining technology to attack the network. And the miners who run the ASICS are the ones with the highest incentive to keep the network running strong.

> Can you explain why the ledger being run by ~27 different entities is NOT decentralized?

Many financial clearing houses are mutualised across many more members. It’s still a centralised clearing house.

Facebook is launching a shadow bank. It’s an old and recurring idea. In 2007 it was hedge funds, in 2019 it’s Facebook. Same schtick, new players.

How many of those 27 entities are registered in US and bound by US sanctions?

Well 3 of the entities are Andreessen-Horowitz, Uber, and Lyft. Not exactly independent concerns.

It's a self-imposed hegemony. Bitcoin is controlled by the consensus of all users.

LIBOR was "decentralized". Then we found out that they were all colluding together.