Bitcoin Forum

I recently read, an article about WEB 2.5 a conceptual term used to make a gateway between WEB 2.0's products and services with WEB 3.0's decentralization. But the question that arises here is, Why is there a need for WEB 2.5? Because there was no mass adoption of decentralization, many projects were coming into the market based on WEB3 but most of them failed to get traffic. Why? the reason was difficult for me.

Like, I thought, every new technology takes a lot of time to get mass adoption. For example, If we Observe BTC, then it took almost 14 years to get globular adoption but still I think it's not that mass. (maybe I would be wrong but that's the way of perception of every mindset). So maybe Web3 will also take time. I know many decentralized swaps and exchanges are in the market like Uniswap and Aave, which has great traffic and adoption but I am talking about other social media, games, and educational projects facing adoption. Like DeFi, which is one of the use cases of Web3.

Why do i think that people did not care about decentralization?
According to Worldometers (https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/), there are around 8 billion of the population throughout the world (not official) and out of which, 5.16 billion are using the Internet, and from that 5.16 billion, 4.76 billion of internet users are using Social media platform. (According to Statista (https://www.statista.com/statistics/617136/digital-population-worldwide/))

As we all know, Social media platforms are centralized ones, like Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram, and Tik Tok, etc. If we really want to remain anonymous by leveraging the features of Web3 then why are we using these centralized platforms? Maybe we are so dependent and addicted to these. Maybe due to mass adoption of it, because where there are more people there is more business and money too then why making effort to shift to another (easily)? The same scenario goes for crypto as well. Like, in crypto there is more trading volume on centralized exchanges while less on decentralized ones. Why? due to less adoption and knowledge may be due to less trust also.

What are your thoughts on it, like if we really want to remain anonymous and want to get more control of the internet by leveraging Web3 then why we are riding on the boat of Web2? Why are we still sticking to centralized platform?

People care about decentralization, but we also cannot deny the fact that we also need the centralized system that's for those who need social media. When you want to protect your private life, you will not want to use social media, but even if you don't make use of social media, it does not mean that your life is completely private. As long as you have social gatherings, family, and friends, your private life has moved above being private.

When you want to talk about the crypto community, those who choose to be on the private side and live free out of the control of others choose the decentralized technology. Why they can also live a totally different life on social media. There are just a few social media platforms out there that are decentralized and totally anonymous. That's why we still make use of Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms out there. On social media, they know what we want them to know about us. But on the blockchain, no one knows who is who or who owns whose wallet.

In conclusion, we care about decentralization because it's all about freedom. Anyone who wants freedom cares about decentralization.

I do not think that the problem is in the concept of centralization, but rather the preferred and well-known model for people is centralization. Banks arose more than 100 years ago, and almost all of us, since we were born, traded in cash, not gold, and even most of us believe that money is only in banks, given that cash payments have declined significantly Thus, the concept of decentralization is new to humans.
Humans are afraid of anything new, let alone responsibility in decentralization. For example:

 - You find that many people forget their bank account.
 - All responsibility in the bank is to prove your identity or signature, and the bank is responsible for securing your money from theft and all risks.
 - In Bitcoin you lose out if you lose access to the private key, most people don't want to take that responsibility.

If we take all these reasons, we will understand people's fear of cryptocurrencies.

I have not yet mentioned the influence of media, fake news, fraud, hacking, and others.

Firstly I would say before the evolution of this web 3 many didn’t believe we could actually do stuffs in decentralized way mainly because that is what the government made us to believe or the technology as at then shaped human mindset to. But that didn’t mean they weren’t people seeking anonymity because even on social medias there are accounts created by individuals with informations or KYCs that are either wrong or has nothing connected to them.

In the case of why there was less adoption of decentralized systems like bitcoin but mass adoption towards the social media I would say it is government policies because they many that believe without government regulating anything it seems more like a scam and when anything goes wrong they could have someone or some body to hold accountable for and that is why we see many centralized platforms like exchanges today. Also bitcoin adoption will be slow compared to the other platforms because it involves money and that takes a longer time for just anybody to entrust there funds to a new platform.

Op to clarify Your analysis of the adoption of Web 2.0 and Web 3.0 You also have to look at the age of entering the two media, as an answer to what you are questioning, because I think why are there still so many people using Web 2.0 because those who use the internet from small children to old people have used it so the comparison will be very far away, because on average those who adopt Web 3.0 are young people who are between 17-30 years old at this time and even then it is still rare because it is not as well-known as Web 2.0 which has been adopted all over the world world. It's not because they don't want decentralization and confidentiality of personal data but rather they just know what social media has to offer in their local environment.

Talking about the economy why are there still many companies or business people still using web 2.0 social media for their services and advertising, because basically they only follow market movements or consumers in places where consumers socialize, if there are already many Web3 users I think the economic rotation will shift also to Web3.

Governments have controlled and regulated us for thousands of years, and they are the largest centralized system. Meanwhile, the concept of decentralization has only received a lot of attention since the birth of bitcoin, and bitcoin has only been around for 14 years, and that is nothing compared to the existence of a centralized system that governments created.
Another thing is, nowadays, people need money more than decentralization. If you don't have money, you have nothing to store, then decentralization is useless. Just like what is happening in the cryptocurrency market, which is considered decentralized, but what people care most about is profit and not seeking privacy or decentralization.

Damn, the spread of decentralized tech is moving at a snail's pace compared to the number of new Web3 projects popping up left and right. But, you gotta keep in mind that it takes a hot minute for folks to get on board with new stuff and change their habits. One reason for this is that centralized platforms are so dang easy to use and we're all used to them. Even with all the perks of decentralization, it's a real struggle to convince people to jump ship, especially if it's gonna take a lot of effort on their part.

However, there's hope on the horizon. DeFi projects like Uniswap and Aave are blowing up and people are itching for decentralized solutions. As the tech gets better, it's looking like more and more people will hop on board. Plus, educating people about why decentralization is the bee's knees will be crucial to getting everyone on the same page. By teaching folks about the importance of data privacy and control, we can get more people to see why Web3 platforms are where it's at.

There's some promising growth and change on the horizon, if you catch my drift. So, let's keep our chins up and spread the word about how freaking amazing decentralized tech is. We'll get there, man. We'll get to that sweet, sweet decentralized future we've been dreaming about.

I believe that if everyone were to be able to use the same services, platforms, apps, etc. with the choice for them to be decentralized or centralized and with no effect on usability, then decentralized would be chosen naturally. The problem is that the most used parts of internet services are centralized and have already gotten the masses to their platforms. The challenge is creating just-as-good platforms that are decentralized and the even greater challenge is attracting the masses to these services.

Until there is a major problem with centralized apps/platforms/services that shines creates a need for people to transition to decentralized services, it will be hard to overcome these challenges. A large-scale cyber attack is an example of the kind of event that could force everyone to make the transition.

In my opinion, people are most interested not in decentralization, but in the convenience of using a particular software product. 

Most people are committed to the principle of hedonism (enjoyment).  At the same time, adherence to the principle of decentralization requires certain efforts from people, and in some cases, the rejection of the convenience and ease of use of software products. 

Centralized services are perceived by people as reliable services, although in fact they are not.  In my opinion, people have to suffer serious financial losses in order to realize the danger of centralized systems. 

At the same time, those in power have realized the potential power of Web 3.0.  They missed the spread of bitcoin and now they will not allow the free development of web 3.0.

People can not be anonymous through Web, so the decentralization is fake. And 98% of all Web users do not care of anonymity. For example, a lot of people use Gmail, which is not decentralized E mail service.

That makes sense actually, while we use social media platforms then we're losing our anonymity on them.
While we advocate about decentralization, we're still and will always be a customer of these centralized platforms and it's because it's just so hard to support a project that even if they say they're fully decentralized, the users won't be expanding that much for being new.
Anyway, with all of these trends, it also make sense that they're just a hype thing that contributes to the market and then eventually we see newer ones in the next year forgetting the past.

The only people that care about decentralization are the pure Bitcoiner. You will be surprised that most cryptocurrency investors don't care about decentralization and from my belief what 80% of all crypto investors care about is the earning benefit of cryptocurrency not decentralization. This is why we see some investors accumulate meme coin based on the hype created by an influence using social media.  
Having said that there's no need for Web2.5 and the last time I checked the web3.0 are doing well though it still lacks the needed traffic but if we see some of the influence that hypes Web3.0 or sees a web3.0 project that introduces the type of airdrop initiated by Uniswap just to give the 80% investors that are only into profit the taste of their medicine we may see some change in the web3.0 market.

You are right on your analysis, and that is actually the answer to your final questions. People don't want to get more control of the internet, people don't want to stay anonymous. People want to be entertained and to be in direct contact with their pairs. You know that, because you are aware about the high popularity of Tik Tok (which is ruled by China), online dating apps, social medias in general and every other applications which enforce viewers accepting cookies and personal data sharing.

Anonymity isn't a demand from the public in general. They don't bother being seen and watched, since they are rewarded (financially or emotionally).

As you said, BTC is just 14 years old which means out of the 8 billion population only around 5 billion are using the Internet and internet is like in the market for decades, and still, 3 billion of the population do not use it, And how can we expect BTC or decentralization to be adopted in mass.

I know good things take time and you would also have an idea of it too, but the world right now mostly Western countries is facing severe economic conditions and due to the election campaigns, many of the citizens discouraged the use of DeFi (so-called use-case of Web3 by you) by asking authorities to legalize the AML policy so more scams and fraud could not take place.

That's also not a good decision for them to ban the overall market instead of catching the ones who are involved n criminal activities. Overall, people have to spend years on centralized platforms and business has risen their empires on these centralized platforms, how could they let people shift towards decentralization so easily? So things will get in to streamline adoption speed when the right time will comes until then buckle up for more restrictions from these so-called centralized authorities (SEC etc.)

The concept of decentralization is necessary because many people seem to have had enough and no longer believe in a centralized financial model. Decentralization gives you financial freedom because no single entity controls it, not even the government.

Whether someone likes this model or not depends only on how comfortable they are with the concept. It also depends on the regulatory policies of the country because in the end the regulation has provided certain limitations. We have found adoption is hampered due to regulations, this also influences whether or not one likes the decentralized concept.

A lot of people still do, but it's hard to ignore the benefits that centralization is giving to people. I know it will take a while for the movement to mature, but it's something that will get there if people just give it a chance. The main problem that we may have from decentralization is its legality and how regulators will try to shut it down instead of regulating it. There's just a lot of tricky scenarios decentralized platforms pose, and that's what makes it hard to go live. Though there are some decentralized services that didn't really hit it and are left to only just close their business.

I observed this a long time ago and realized that people do not care enough about decentralized platforms. I think people like to stay in their comfort zone. So, if there will be a change one day, I guess it will be due to some obligations. In fact, the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica data scandal should have changed everyone's mind, but people still prefer to be reckless about it. I don't know, they know their data is being used, but they still use centralized platforms, I don't know, I don't know what to say about this.

Not only majority of the population doesn't care about decentralization, the same is true for crypto "enthusiasts" who also refuse to use decentralized alternatives - because they only come to crypto for making profits on speculative trading. Decentralized alternatives are objectively worse in most regards compared to centralized ones - in things like ease of use, user interface, response times, features, costs of use. Most people don't want to compromise on that for the sake of decentralization.

that's what people usually call "fear of the unknown". as exactly as you've said that most people find it easier to let other people handle their finances for example the role of the banks, while in decentralized ecosystem there nobody is in charge of nobody, so in order for that to be effective, one must be responsible enough to take care of their own, and that's mostly what people find annoying specially in the case of rich people. in terms of social media statistics, ever since the beginning of mankind entertainment already existed and we are all aware that people are drawn to something exclusive. being on trend is something people find it exclusive so some people are scrambling just to be recognized in the crowd as one of those special people in the internet, and let's admit the fact that nowadays those people i mentioned only care about decentralization and privacy once they are threatened or those information they broadcasted online will be used against them.

I think decentralization to the masses matters more in developing countries and areas with corrupt governments. Basically it’s risky keeping your money there because they can print more and devalue it or they can get the banks to freeze your money. In North America that isn’t really an issue.

Hence that’s why many want to stay away from the centralization world and want something decentralized like Bitcoin and the new dex that we have right now. People don’t want to depend on a governing body for their safety when the times get tough.

until there is nothing that forces people to go to decentralized platforms, we will stay on centralized exchanges. but if the government is will ban crypto and penalizing someone who is engaging with it, users will likely go to dexes.

so far there are regulations already.  once the government realizes the crypto is not really something they want, they will ban crypto. and its when dex and web3 might just be helpful.

Ignorance could be because they don't see the importance of decentralization, and in the end, decentralization will always not be full decentralization because the government will regulate everything that is called decentralization because the government wants to control it.
And even though decentralization was eventually adopted by many sectors, it took a long time to actually implement it because often the convenience of centralization became a barrier from using decentralization on a large scale.

I think most people don't care about decentralization, this is because they are already in the comfort zone, namely an economic and financial system that is fully regulated by the state, decentralization is a threat because many countries consider that a decentralized system will create more problems than benefits.

You confused the decentralization's purpose with social life (maybe I misunderstood your statement, if yes, then please correct me), as the main purpose of Decentralization is to make anonymous transactions without giving control of your, assets, documents, etc. to any other entity and totally depend on it. Like, if you make a transaction, you wish no one knows who is behind that transaction, so you tried to remain anonymous. 
Social media platforms definitely know about us, but is it true, that transactions on the decentralized blockchain are totally anonymous? because as far as I know, that's not true. And that's also my main point in the post. Like if people are already given their activity data and personal data to these centralized platforms then how can they leverage the benefits of decentralization?

These reasons are totally generic and similar problems are also the fortune of centralized platforms. Like recent bank bankruptcies in the USA that cause a great impact on the crypto industry. Adoption of anything new almost takes 20 to 40 years as I have seen but for my country, it's more. hehe. literally, in our society, everyone used to say, that our country started to think about adopting new technology when other nations already took advantage of that technology and suck the blood out of it.

Totally, right. But that's also due to less or no access to technologies like we have today. We are revolutionizing day by day. Governments, has made such economic situations and offers for there peoples that they can not ignore and forced to use many immoral services to meet there daily requirements. (i call loan+interest system by bank which has been given the name of interest instead that's open usury). Once we have been left no choice, then what people can do rather than accepting it and getting further tuck in the quagmire of offers and manipulated situations.

I have not a slight idea of this fact. Like how could they verified by agencies and exchange if they are not sharing the right data, I think they use others data by taking it legal or illegal means or is there any other way too?

IMO, The development of Web3 technology is still in its early stages, new technologies are often difficult to launch and often take time to achieve stability and reliability. Most of the current users are still not familiar with the new Web3 system and still have many difficulties in using Web3 applications. In addition, they are afraid of risk and uncertainty when using products and services built on the decentralized Web3. The Web2 platform is growing very fast and its power is still great, creating a lot of value for users. So Web2 developers still want to keep the system intact and continue to improve it. However, the future of Web3 is still very promising with outstanding benefits in protecting privacy, ensuring safety, and giving users complete control over their data. Therefore, taking advantage of those potentials of Web3 should be paid attention to and actively invested in on Web3 platforms to increase connectivity and diversification, and help take Web3 technology further in the future.

I didn't confuse decentralization with social life; rather, I used your key words to give a befitting illustration regarding a centralized system and that of a decentralized system. 

Social media knows what we want them to know about us. It's what I input online as me that the social media captures and keeps as a record of me. I can also decide to live a fake life online, impersonating someone else.

"Decentralized blockchains are totally anonymous?" Yes or no, you are anonymous when you want to be anonymous, and your privacy is protected to some extent when you want it to be. 
If you truly want to make a decentralized transaction without risking your privacy, you need to use a system that's totally in line with your beliefs. You can't talk about decentralization while also making use of centralized systems like exchanges. I know there is more of a centralized system than a decentralized system, and most of the claims of decentralized transactions are not mainly decentralized because they keep track of our transaction records, etc. 

To some point out, transactions are actually not anonymous the way we think they are. We can completely make that possible without any issue; one can run its own node, use a mixing service, etc. which can guarantee your privacy protection at a higher level. 

Decentralized and anonymous are different.

Decentralized means you don't want to be controlled by the government or any other central party. While anonymous means you're don't want everyone know your identity including to be controlled by the government.

If you want to being complete anonymous, make sure you never create ID card, driving license, bank account, don't go too school, don't work under someone company etc because you need to submit your identity :P

In addition to the age factor and level of mass adoption of Web 2 and focus of businesses towards more trafficking platforms. There is another factor that influences the adoption rate, which is the geographic targeting of these Web 3 services to target specific tier countries. Why? The reason is open. To loot and thug them. There have been published many reports about how hackers have stolen Billions of dollars only via DeFi platforms. You can see these resources for quick viewing. Source 1 (https://www.zdnet.com/finance/blockchain/22-billion-in-cryptocurrency-stolen-from-defi-platforms-in-2021-report/), 2 (https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/19/over-10-billion-lost-to-defi-scams-and-thefts-in-2021.html).

The number of people who fell victim to these DeFi platforms is mostly from tier 1 countries. Why? Because these DeFi services are not even running their ads in our places (for that i am grateful) (note* i am not against decentralization but stating the fact, for educational purposes only). This indicates that the bad actors of the community have used these features of Web3 for bad purposes which left no choice for authorities to make suck policies like AML etc.

There is no doubt how fast BTC has gained adoption compared to centralized services and the government is the meaning of people (groups) have power and authority to make, change and modify law etc. So government=centralization, now the main concern is, people have been provided a platform and they still dependent on centralized ones. In the last, people like me no doubt ha speculated market like a business opportunity to make profits but i think they also want to seek decentralization with it just not want to leave centralization. Why? because they are highly interlinked!

That's totally true that folks's interest could make anything famous just like today's celebrities with no talent hehe. And that's what i am afraid of too. Like out of 8 billion people how many are in good actor category and how many are in bad one. No way, to conclude that because of well-defined judgment of each person according to there mindset. Many bad actors has looted people's money using this feature which i have already mentioned not good for it's upcoming future but the pace of web3 adoption is still amazing, it could spike more if money which had been stolen out of this sector, will not happened.  But in the long run i totally agreed with you. because decentralization will make everyone independent and will built confidence in them but proper policies are required (i think) to manage the good use-case of it. (not AML but maybe another mechanism)

The reverse question is whether you really control the internet properly and remain anonymous. and can you ensure that your activity is clean from data capture?
It's all about the taste of people who decide to stay on the path of full decentralization or indeed just as needed. So far it is difficult to classify into a decentralized container if it still requires a centralized system let alone bound by a contract with exchange parties. More specifically, at this time, no one can really avoid centralization, let alone not really care. Because the most important thing for some people is the benefits that are wrapped in it.

Yeah, people care. It shows how enthusiastic people are for bitcoin now while keeping the natural decentralized concept. While web 3.0 isn't as decentralized in practice as it is hoped to be, there are some aspects that simply don't allow it to be decentralized either unable to give developers an "benefits" or possibly creating a powerful force that turns against them.

That's true. People ignore this until they're hit in the face by the lack of it.

You could see this in real time in Canada during the protests a year ago. People had no need for decentralization and privacy, but one day their accounts got blocked and they couldn't buy a coffee or fuel for their tracks just because they happened to go against the government restrictions. People support privacy and decentralization on paper, when someone asks them for their opinion, but they like convenience. They want people top do everything for them and to take responsibility. That's what we are - lazy!

As much as I love crypto websites and apps should be close to where their clients are.
CDN for most sites are slow down, so are the fonts you fetch from Google.
web3 is a standart no one needs except for eBay, Amazon and such.

If people who are not morally ready for freedom are given that freedom, they will start looking for someone who will lead them. Very many people are simply not ready for decentralization - they simply do not know what to do with it. Decentralization is interesting for those who have money; if a person lives from paycheck to paycheck, he does not need decentralization at all.

People care care about decentralization. They will enjoy it when given them, but surely people do not want to pay the sacrifice that accompanies decentralization. There are things people doesn't want to give up and that is what will be tying people down to centralization. For instance;

• People's desire to connect one another. People's desire to connect man to businesses, connect businesses to other businesses etc
• People's desire to track and monitor their peers, work colleagues, partners etc. Social media is the best place to monitor one another.
• Making new friends and searching for old friends comes with much excitement

In as much as people doesn't want to give up these desires, we should expect more because even children in their mothers womb are being exposed to social media.

At times, its a question of popularity. What's more common than others amongst folks and pairs, the ease one has in using one platform compared to the other and the trust they've been able to owe to a system over time compared to that which they have to rely on mare claims form the developers. When it comes to cryptocurrency, I becomes more of that which is common really.

Social medias, I won't want go bring it into context with cryptocurrency as they both are too distinct, one is about communication and the other payment options. Non the less, popularity still plays an important role here.

Recently, centralized exchanges have had problems and some of them have closed due to the interference of the country's governments. So communities' trust in centralized exchange platforms has decreased.

       Apart from this fact, the trust of the majority in the decentralized platform has increased because the chances are high that the government can never tamper with it, especially with the stablecoins that are there compared to the stable ones that are placed on the centralized platform.

Those people whoe doesnt care about the decentralization concept will never know what actually the benefit they could get , the problem that get solved efficiently ... it's just the matter of the time for people to realize that they are really needed it.

For now there is only few people do care about this and working on it tho.

People have different views about personal privacy, being anonymous, and being decentralized.  If Bitcoin is not presented or created, we could have been doing things under centralized supervision.  The idea and implementation of decentralization is still young so many people are still new to it.  Most people are comfortable using centralized services and it is hard for these people to try a new system where he has to test and learn everything.  People wanted to be always in their comfort zone and is afraid to try new innovations and changes which include the blockchain and decentralized services.

I believe we still need more time for the people to be accustomed to decentralization.  It is not that they don't care but rather the idea is new to them.

Aside from that, the comfortability between centralization and decentralization is a big thing.

Although lots of risks being under decentralization, it's good to experience the freedom we are getting being in that.

I'm not against a centralized system but it's just that, not all the time we should always deal with that.

From birth, our identity is not anonymous, the government controls us from the beginning.
I'm not saying it's good to use centralized exchanges, but many people claim that their identities are exposed because of those exchanges. This is not entirely true because our identity is made public when we use the services you mentioned.

Bitcoin only helps us to limit financial control from the government, it cannot help us to be completely anonymous. This is what many people confuse and think just using bitcoin, we are completely anonymous and not tracked by the government.

Honestly, a small percentage of the world population seriously cares about decentralisation while the majority don't mind centralisation as long as they don't face any kind of major issues.

Even popular decentralised cryptocurrencies, exchanges etc aren't 100% decentralised for various reasons.

I do not think majority of people will everly realise the importance of decentralization. It will only be minority few that will appreciate the essence of decentralization.
Why it is so is because centralization is fighting restlessly against decentralization everyday and centralization is more powerful because it is the government.

We should instead be scared because even the cryptocurrency industry is filled with centralization. Even our saving grace which is bitcoin, there is many efforts to centralise it by moving it from one chain to the other etc.

It's really easy to answer, if people are care about decentralization, you will see Bisq and no KYC P2P will have higher trading volume rather than all of centralized exchanges e.g. Binance, Kraken, Coinbase, Kucoin, etc. But if you have compare it, you will see the trading volume in Bisq and no KYC P2P are really small compared to centralized exchanges. Maybe you can conduct a survey in your countries, ask 100 random peoples and let's see what's the result.

I'm pretty sure that actually almost everyone would prefer decentralization if they realized that all this time they were in a centralized system where everything was determined by central policy. but very few people are aware of this system, especially in the elderly today. but for the next generation starting from our current generation. then I'm pretty sure that many of us have realized the importance of decentralization. but that doesn't mean we don't need centralization. we still need centralization in one field but not in another. We are all created with an instinct to like freedom and not like to be controlled. but the problem is that many people are now being controlled but they are not aware that they are being controlled.

1.Most people don't care about decentralization.
2.Decentralization isn't ALWAYS better than centralization.
3.Creating a decentralized social media platform would create problems with copyright infringement and hate speech. Also, which company would want to create a decentralized platform? Who is going to get the ad revenue, when the platform is decentralized?

I couldn't care less about crypto trading volume on centralized exchanges because:
1.Most altcoins are shitcoins anyway. We don't need altcoins and tokens. Bitcoin Core is more than enough to serve the purpose of the crypto world.
2.Trading volume can be faked.

The actual problem of decentralisation is that there can't be full decentralisation, since there are certain situations which demand altering the initial code (forking), which can be done only by centralised structures, and also centralisation occurs in wallets and crypto-fiat exchangers. So any decentralised project has tendency to face some centralization elements.

I'm sure many people do not care about decentralization, they prefer centralization so that their money is not crashing like decentralization, and in terms of security indeed decentralization is very dangerous and will not make us calm, if we have $ 1 million money in decentralization then there is a chance of $ 1 million to $ 10 or even under $ 1.

Yes everyone will prefer decentralization because of privacy protection. I don't know why number of users in centralization are more than Dex. centralized social media platform are easy to use and you have to perform some simple task for registration. Second bug reason may be because these social Platform was launched first before Decentralized platform. But now many users migrated to telegram from Whatsapp because of decentralization and similarly Twitter users are migrating to Lens which showing that People love to use decentralization but biggest problem with decentralized platform is lack of big platform like Facebook, twitter. Many users will adopt in ten years because of interest showing by people towards decentralization.

Yes because everything else is controlled by a very small amount of extremely rich people. Decentralisation is tge only thing that creates an honest market, you can’t get rugged by some shady dev or group. Bitcoin is the only investment I totally trust, everything else is just a short term fix to try & get more fiat.

Only a small percentage of the global population are really using the decentralised transactions of cryptocurrencies. This means that there is a small percentage who actually understand what these decentralization really means to them. So, I agree that most of people really don't care about these. But I must say also that there is really a case to case basis to how bigger deal is the decentralization compared to a centralized form of transactions. It isn't always that decentralization is better than the other. Also, I think what really people care about is in the process on whether it is fast and cost efficient. This, I think, would determine the adaptation of majority into these decentralization.

That is already happening  (people are becoming more educated about data and it's uses) but we do not need a major problem in centralized platforms, all we need is to get knowledge of how important our data is for businesses. Because if we talk about IOTs (internet of things) that are generating 1,000 Petabytes in one day. Which is just too big but that's another discussion about managing them.

For now, data from social media is one of them and once we get to know the importance of it and how big organizations are using our data for their own purposes will convince people to move to decentralization. Because decentralization will provide fewer data of your activities in compared to centralized ones. Well, this could be another problem in the adoption of Decentralization as it will affect the features that our governments are using from the big dataset.

It means, these web3-based products must have a user-friendly interface that will create no problem to perform tasks even for a traditional (non-technical person). But that's have been in the market too, but do not provide the luxury of existing ones, so. you are right.
People are readily suffering serious financial losses by leveraging the centralized system for example in my area there is one bank that is famous for giving inside information about users' accounts and the money in it. I have seen many cases when people withdrew their money from that Bank and got robbed on the way to home. Why? How can those thieves get to know about the money the person has withdrawn? Because someone from the bank has given a tip to those Robbers and this is not a new problem. But if we can make transactions with full anonymity of personal information no one can get to know us in real life so there will be no such cases.

If your concerns are about the web which is the internet in which different devices are connected to each other for the purpose of sharing information such as making transactions and sending and receiving files which is also a type of transaction. So, what actually we need here is, we want to hide our personal identities so that a bad actor can not target us even if he gets to know what's in the email. That needs encryption and security mechanisms which are provided by blockchain technology so the platforms which ask for Gmail accounts are not the decentralized ones because as you mention email services are not decentralized so anyone could temper with your data but if you use functions like wallet address, which only provide the information about your wallets and how much money you have in your wallet from where you are getting that money and where you are sending that money. These types of information are of very limited use to the bad actors. So I think people can be anonymous through the web if they could hide their identities and many of the experts are doing that which is not liked by authorities.

It came back to people threat modelling, some want to protect their digital privacy and some do not care. Some of them are aware of what kind of data those monopoly companies collect and what they generated themselves, but they want to simply live as conveniences as possible. if someone wants to go into the decentralized routes convenience is not exist.

Snowden shocked the world with how the US collected and spied on its citizen and also the whole internet, yet does the majority of people in many parts of the world are aware of him? And also do those who were truly cautious about it and advocated for privacy are having its significance to educate the public? My main take is some people choose the easy route, the convenient. The simple thing. Those big companies besides giving those things are cultivating the ecosystem so there is a continuity for the users themselves to engage and create anything, I'm afraid a decentralized model would not be able to compete with it.

In your words, you provided the logical answer to your questions. There are really two reasons why people are not interested in decentralization:
- Complete ignorance of the basics of decentralization and its benefits. This leads us to a complete lack of interest in privacy and the risks that this may cause. This ignorance is supported by centralization in order to maintain its authority, which is what makes it withstand the various obstacles.
- Centralized services are still able to provide easier and more flexible features that decentralized services cannot provide in their current development. How many decentralized applications can you count for me than a few trading platforms?

You answered your own question, very few people care about decentralization because very few understand the costs they are paying by allowing monopolies like Facebook to have full control of their information, they do not understand that their information is valuable and they are giving it away for free, if anything Facebook should pay them to get access to their personal information, after all people should wonder about why Facebook is worth so much money when they do not seem to sell anything? That is because the product they sell is the information of the people using their platform.

There really aren't many decentralized applications. Every project has developers-that is, owners who can be pressured and who can manipulate those who are interested in the project. In addition - a project always has bottlenecks - for example, the probability of an attack of 51% 

I'm sure only a few people think and care about decentralization, it's proven that cryptocurrencies users are still small, many are afraid if decentralization is easily controlled by those who have capital so they can destroy assets in a short time.

While I can appreciate the allure of liberty and self-determination, I also recognise the need for some form of oversight to maintain peace and security. Consider: without police or governments, how would we manage to keep crime at bay and keep the economy running?

Nevertheless, we must not blindly back control. It is necessary to strike a balance between the two, and to recognise that there are instances when one approach is superior to the other.

This discussion of centralization versus decentralisation is getting out of hand; let's not let it. To the contrary, we need to discover the optimal solution for each circumstance, be it a centralised or decentralised system. Being exceptionally perceptive and discovering the most effective next steps is, after all, what matters most.

FB earns a lot on advertising, it used to be a simple social network for communication, but now it’s a big platform for selling, including, well, everything is thought out very well, people add themselves, indicate their data and interests, regarding this they are offered goods. Everything is built on the interests of the consumer society, in this case, not  a person looking for goods and advertising is looking for a consumer.

There obviously isn't a burning need for it, else blockchain technology would have taken off shortly after bitcoin was invented (or even as soon as the concept of a decentralized blockchain was thought of), but here we are years later and have big corporations adopted decentralized anything to make their businesses better?  Nope.

There's a damn good reason why you wouldn't want an immutable ledger of things, and I always think about the medical field when I'm pondering such matters.  There are security issues up the wazoo, and that's in addition to the fact that perhaps some people don't want their medical records stored indefinitely, even if not everyone gets to see them.  Plus to the average Facebook, social media-addicted person, it doesn't matter who's in charge of their data.  Even when there's a major breach, the outrage only lasts for a week or two and then their minds are glued to some other story.

I can't say I've heard much about Web 2.5 in any case.  Sounds like just another buzz-phrase that won't have any meaning come next year.

People only take alternative technologies serious when it offers them something that they need. So, one of the advantages of decentralization is that it increases your security, because centralized services are easy targets.

So if your services are under constant DoSS attacks, it might be one of the reasons why you might consider using decentralization to increase uptime .... and adoption increase under the people that understand decentralization's benefits.  ;D

On Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, you have to upload your photos, these platforms aren't meant to be used anonymously. Have a look, people post photos with each-other and tag each-other, I hope you get the point what kind of platforms these websites are and how people want to use them and yes, that's definitely normal as it should be. The problem is not what you mean, the problem is that people send very private and sensitive messages, very private pictures, constantly post on their timeline where they are, what they it, where they go, i.e. describing their life in details.
While people know that social media companies analyze all of their messages, behaviors and every detail, they still do and share things they shouldn't be making it available for such a companies. This proves that people don't care about centralization, they just want service and that's all.

The same applies to cryptocurrencies. I bet, majority of crypto users don't care or don't even know the pros and cons of cryptocurrencies and the minority group of them that knows it, doesn't really care. It's used as an investment option. Look, Binance offers Futures trading, options, leveraged tokens, swap farming, DeFi Stacking, Liquidity Farming, Launchpad. There are so many options out there to try, it looks like a casino with lots of exciting games. Decentralized exchages can't offer such a diversity.

Simple Answer based on my opinion Does People Really Care About Decentralization?

Some care some doesn't care. But the point is we need a balance between centralization and Decentralization, not all gonna work or at least gonna run well with the Centralization system and Vice Versa. We need both centralization and decentralization in some way.

I always feel that those who care are definitely in the minority. Most of those who read news about privacy & security issues, those who happen to be a victim of one of those issues, and so on. Those proportions might change if awareness about privacy is increasing, plus more decentralized alternatives become available (that are not that difficult and require many setups to use). I do agree that it won't come that soon, the market is still very new, and demand in general is not that high compared to centralized alternatives.

However, I also think it is not that far off since people are being exposed to many centralized system failures recently, such as a bank run, a defunct exchange, and so on. At the end of the day, most people still value flexibility and ease of use, so until there is a very good decentralized product that fits that bill, I expect the number of people who use decentralized services to increase. Unless they are mainly dealing with fiat, which I doubt can be streamlined unless you touch KYC and AML. CMIIW.

What is an example of that? Exchanges will be the ones who need a third party to make sure they don't scam their users. Most of them have no incentive to go decentralized if they can just pay a fee every now and then to make sure they can continue their services and rake in millions of profits.

There is basically no concept of caring about decentralization or not, people tend to use whatever they get to use first, and since all centralized platforms were first fed to the public, they started using them and now they are so indulged in them that it is almost impossible to take them out of that and put them in another platform which is totally decentralized.

One more thing is the features that they offer, if we talk about exchanges, decentralized exchanges don't and can't have as many features to offer to their users as centralized exchanges can, and people will surely prefer the one which gives the more options than the one which has very limited use cases.

This is so true and that is why I think many people are forgetting about the fact that we are not really annoyed by centralized stuff as much as people think. I mean some people might be, and yes it is awesome that there are decentralized options and all. But that doesn't change the fact that we are not going to see centralized as bad suddenly.

It's not going to happen and I am happy about it and I will keep on investing into that. That's just how I see things and I will promote them both and I will use them both and I will like them both. People assume just because you like dex you may dislike cex or vice versa, that's not the case, I am willing to try and use both of them at the same time without a worry.

The reason why most people use or prefer to use centralized exchanges is that they offer way more usage options and features than decentralized exchanges, and people don't only use the spot market and that's it, they want all kinds of different options and features and opportunities to maximize their earnings, people love bonuses and competitions and that's what centralized exchanges provide.

A decentralized exchange can only provide a simple spot market for spot traders and no other options or features, they don't even have a futures trading option that covers a very large amount of trades taken on a centralized exchange.

You got a point because cryptos are decentralized but some of them are not totally anonymous. Again in crypto, there are now regulations (KYC) that are being put in place. This greatly exposes the identity of the people. It's still up to us if we will comply with it or not because there are still fully decentralized sites out there which we can use.

Governments can't totally control the entire crypto world. This is why they are butthurt about it. The last thing that you said is hard. I can't imagine how can someone live or survive without those when those are essential in our life. It's okay to not submit your personal i.d online but we can not avoid it in real life.

Any coins that not decentralized is not a cryptocurrency, that is my view point. Even they are classified as alternative coins but I place them under the category of CBDC. Cryptocurrency is not meant to be centralized and controlled by any authorities because the would control the coin to the extend that the coin can't grow but it will die. As awhead999 placed it, the two different are clear for every bitcoin users to understand. Bitcoin users are unknown because the project was created to be so and decentralized. I think the two are working together.

Understand that Rome was not built In a day, good things don't come easy, if it comes easy, then it comes common, web3 was only introduced some few years back, web3 is not yet developed to the standard which it can be fully adopted,  there are still very many security flaws in web3 that needs to be fixed before mass adoption happens.

The nutshell is that, web3 is still underdeveloped, in its current capacity, it can't handle the kind of traffick web 2 handles, take the Ethereum network as an example, when many users stated doing transactions on the Ethereum network, what happened?, the network gas fee skyrocketed to prices many users can not afford to spend as a gas fee, that caused many individuals, and projects to leave the Ethereum network for other blockchains with lesser fees, this was how bsc became a major contender in the crypto space..

If every internet user right now should all flock to web3, it is very possible that the system will collapse before our very eyes, simply because it's not matured enough to handle such traffick.

Mere propaganda. I have yet to encounter a cryptocurrency user that is not concerned about the whether their cryptocurrency is decentralized or not. And that's not to say that I'm only in an echo chamber of people who are die hard fans of bitcoin and its decentralized nature because everywhere I go where there is bitcoin to be discussed they always bring up bitcoin's decentralization as one of its best feature. So to me, this just looks like propaganda put out by anyone really at this point, to make the people lose interest with bitcoin's decentralization and connectively bitcoin itself by means of the bandwagon bias. Ultimately to me they may sway people into their side and antagonize bitcoin but there will always be people who are supportive of bitcoin and are for bitcoin's decentralized nature.

Most reasonable people care about privacy but they don't realize how much information are weaponized against them by advertisers, government, law enforcement, etc. They'll sign up for social media apps without having any idea of what information is being datamined and permanently stored. Economic decentralization works the same way, people would much rather rely on someone, usually the government, to sustain economic activity out of ignorance to any other economic system.

Ignorance is bliss.

You're right, some people do care about decentralization, but they still end up using centralized platforms out of habit or convenience. It's kinda funny how we don't always notice that are giving up decentralization by using these platforms. But in most case, it is because of how easy it is to use those platforms. Web3 and defi stuffs are new to most people. I guess it takes time for everyone to really get the hang of it and switch to decentralized alternatives. As more people become aware and new decentralized options get user-friendly (which lets be honest, is not at all), we'll see a shift towards those tech. But for now, it's all about spreading the word and making people feel comfortable using decentralized methods.

We gonna take example of Exchanges no matter what Centralized Exchange have a lot of contribution to a whole crypto adoption. In the other hand bad actor makes Centralized Exchange looks bad that is why we need balance. and Decentralized Exchange arrive.

In other industries take a look at commodity and stock exchange, it always uses Centralized exchange so the government can do regulations and protect the customer.

Just because centralized platforms are been used widely by everybody on the planet doesn't mean we don't want decentralization. The problem here is that just the centralized platforms were the only choices available or they were the most popular and people loves using what's popular and trending and that's why we have centralized apps dominating the social media.

Same thing happened in the market before we're now having decentralized exchange trying to get some volume. If we didn't care about decentralization then we won't be using those decentralized exchanges and application that helps keep us anonymous.

People have gotten used to government power and control over their lives, that's why some people are still waiting for the government to regulate cryptocurrency before they have invested their money, those who are out of crypto investment are bigger than those who are into crypto investment and that is fine, it's only a matter of time anyways, gradually crypto adoption will keep growing pace by pace.

Decentralization in the crypto space belongs to Bitcoin because this is the only digital currency that really approaches decentralization, it is fine and acceptable to say that not everyone will prefer Bitcoin, and for many, it will take a longer time for them to realize how important decentralization can be for humanity.

Decentralization can't be forced.

I think the answer is no, people don't really care about decentralization. And if we talk about people who are not in crypto they don't even know what is decentralization. And when we talk about it they can't imagine moving from the centralized system, it's simply like that, and crypto is created by the CIA to control the world... long story short!



It's not as mass as we want it to be... so you are not wrong or right, you (like many of us) are just impatient. But things are looking a lot better than 9 years ago (when I found out about crypto). But it's definitely growing, and in some places of the world that growth is faster... while in countries like mine is things are going pretty slow.

The fact is that those who want to have fun on the Internet are the majority.
Many people do not think that we can do everything with the transactions of the world free from intermediaries. They want just watching funny little dogs and cat and playing around in tiktok.
I love dogs and cats too :) but as a crypto enthusiast, I want the global financial system to finally move to a new level, thanks to blockchain.

Not everyone appreciates decentralization, it will show transparency and immutability of transactions, and this can hinder the business of many intermediaries in the world. Those who are used to making money out of manipulation and the opacity of their affairs.

I think many people don't care about the idea of decentralization, this is because people will be busy with work or focused on making money, especially if they know the risks of decentralization which can crash money, centralization will of course guarantee that our calculations or estimates of money are more accurate.

For web decentral is a bad idea if your Userbase comes from one country. Most websites work that way.
Ok for the million of eBays sure it could work.

The only people I have seen so far that care about decentralization are those who receive payments of make heavy transaction use the system. The tax that would be incurred can not compare to that of a centralized exchange, and anonymity isn't guaranteed after all. So why even bother.
Although the risk involved is more for a decentralized system because if your funds is lost due to wrong wallet address or scammers get ahold of such an address, it can hardly be tracked down.
We also have the issue of market volatility affecting a decentralized system which is unlike that of a centralized system with steady rates.
It finally boils down to individual preference or mode of earning.

internet users are not conscious of the information they share about themselves even on social media. they do have school IDs and driver's licenses somehow on their facebook making them not anonymous.

anonymous is a plus but i think not being anonymous is not what decentralization is. it's about no one controlling and collecting data from a decentralized platform, especially in finances.

Actually when looking at it as a whole for myself personally, I care quite a lot about decentralization but not all that is done must always be decentralized because in other cases I also still need a centralized system.
Actually it depends on which perspective we see, I think as long as it is centralized it is still better from one aspect then it can be done but on the other hand from another perspective when decentralization is better then the choice means there. I'm not going to be naive about this because as long as I still have an advantage for myself in both then I'll use it because indeed we live, of course we have to find the easiest way to deal with it.

Decentralised had played huge role in the history of bitcoin a lot.Because bitcoin is decentralised crypto currency,the creator of the bitcoin doesn’t have a control over the bitcoin price.As we know Ethereum is the centralised cryptocurrency,the owner of Eth had control over the entire price of Ethereum.This decentralised system had made the bitcoin top the crypto currency in the market,So traders can inverse in the decentralised currency to earn more profit at any time.The decentralised doesn’t allow us to find the coin which send wrong address because of it’s decentralised behaviour.

Decentralisation is really a good technology for storing data, it has all the benefits you describe. But in practical use its benefits are often overestimated. First, storage of so much data copies in so many computers leads to problems with overlaying the data. Mining facilities possess enough resources to compute, while internet communications don't. This leads to continuous fixing of forks, and at some moment the overall system can fail in unifying the whole worldwide data. Second thing is that it has tendency to centralise through seemingly decentralised association of main holders, whose collective interest is to hold people under control via the money they collected. We can see the same thing with USD and other fiats: main capital holders are also a problem, not only the printing site. However, no possibility to emit money from a centralised organisation is a great step towards fair currency dynamics even if it doesn't solve the problem of capital holders. IMHO, benefits of decentralised currencies overrun their drawbacks, but in order to build up fair economy there should be ways to decentralise not only emission and support (mining), but also capital distribution.

In my point of view in some situation decentralization really matters,  decentralization can also be important from a legal point of view, especially in the United states. Bitcoin and Ethereum are largely exepmt from regulatory pressure because they're decentralized and not controlled by any one person and in another situations it's just not that important. Everyone can choose which blockchains they use, and weather they want to pay higher transaction fees to crypto cryptocurrencies.

For some, this is a matter of habit, for some it is convenience, but if you remove one thing now, then many will lose their usual comfort. It seems to me that people are not very worried about decentralization, because it is important for them to shift their responsibility to someone else, let banks be responsible for their money, the state is responsible for their pension, this is convenient because you can always find the culprit if something goes wrong. And this is not their fault, they were just taught like that from childhood, and it seems convenient to them.

It is important or not?, the truth is that decentralized systems are very important. Some features that are not available in centralized systems, such as transparency, security, and full control over personal data, are aspects that can be emphasized on decentralized platforms.

However, why are centralized platforms superior in some sectors? Because their teams and developers know what users need.

Large Marketing Budget and Advertising
We know that centralized platforms have a large budget for marketing and advertising needs, so they are able to attract a wider audience. Unlike decentralized systems, which seem to have a limited budget.

Better UX
Centralized platforms mostly provide a better user experience compared to decentralized platforms. We all would prefer a platform with many features, interrelated services, short page loading speed, easy accessibility, and so on.
Example :

Network and User Management
This is a strategy of centralized platforms that makes their services more reliable, due to the management of a large user base. Whenever there are many users, new users will come because this is included in the network effect. A large number of users can certainly increase the value of the related platform. And this is closely related to user trust.

This is my opinion without taking sides between centralized and decentralized platforms.

The people of today are so used to delegate everything to someone else that they simply do not understand our objections to the massive amount of centralization we are witnessing these days, the only way for them to understand is for the current system to collapse and realize that leaving their fate at the hands of others and hoping to not get screwed is a huge mistake, but who knows how long it will take for this to happen, and until then bitcoin will have to make do with our support.

The real problem that is happening right now is that we are still quite dependent on fiat which makes us inevitably have to do this in centralization.
We live where the rules regarding decentralization are still being developed and of course as long as this is still happening, centralization is still something that is indeed quite important. Even though we don't believe in it because it is indeed considered as one that is indeed deviant when it comes to financial freedom, things like this still cannot be simply dismissed.

If you think of it, decentralization also has pros and cons which it would be hard to adapt in real world. We all know the good benefits of controlling your funds and have freedom to do your will for your funds, however centralization is still a must as it gives us security and assurance. Since decentralization are also more on fraud, scam and criminal activities that may cause chaos in the economy soon. That's why it's the centralization job to maintain the peaceful economy for their people.

    -  Actually, here in the crypto business we can't deny that there are still many people who enjoy decentralized exchanges, maybe most of the centralized ones who entered cryptocurrency have just gotten used to it.

But if we look at both of them, they have the same pros and cons, in short they also have a big difference when it comes to its features. There is Cex without DEX and vice versa also with DEX of course.

I do care about decentralization when it comes to cryptocurrencies and dealing with money, in terms of exchanges or staking platforms such as Beefy. However, our personal details are out there, on social media platforms, in our emails, and on all services that deal with our information. On top of that, they can never truly be erased from the internet, no matter what; thus, our digital footprint remains forever, and there's nothing we can do about it.

As a result, to a large degree, I've stopped caring too much; however, at least I try to avoid sharing any unnecessary information or signing up for sketchy services.

It is true that many projects based on Web3 have struggled to gain traction and adoption, which is why the concept of Web 2.5 has emerged as a possible solution to bridge the gap between Web 2.0 and Web 3.0. and  One reason for the slow adoption of Web3 could be attributed to the fact that it is still a relatively new and complex technology that may be difficult for the average user to understand and navigate.

Additionally, the convenience and familiarity of centralized platforms may be hard to overcome for some users, despite the potential benefits of decentralization.

However, as more people become educated and familiar with Web3 technology and its potential benefits, we may see a shift towards greater adoption and use of decentralized platforms and applications.

About Does People Really Care About Decentralization?n as you said I don't think it's because people don't care about decentralization, but they don't fully realize its benefits and how it can change the game of the internet as we know it.

Of course, decentralization is important, but what do people need more than money? Without money, what is privacy or decentralization for? All will be in vain without creating value. People invest in bitcoin because what they need is money, and only when they have money do people think about privacy. As for those who have no money, decentralization is useless as I said.

Is it really a matter of habit, truly just a matter of need or what they think they do/don't need? I believe it's more about the need/what they think they need. Ask an ordinary person, let's pretend the person has an idea, if he/she needs decentralization, and I'm very confident the answer from more than 80% of them would be "NO". Which true in my opinion. Decentralization doesn't have to be everywhere in our lives, although we truly need a decentralized, permissionless, censorship-resistant cryptocurrency as a fall-back in case our current financial system fails.

I will say that many are yet to know about what decentralization really mean, being decentralized is not in buying bitcoin alone but where to have it stored is also very important, the kind of crypto that we choose is also to be considered because every other cryptos were regarded as centralized except bitcoin but you must ensure that your bitcoin is in your personal decentralized wallet, a cold storage preferably is good for use, many heard about decentralization but don't know how to realize it into effective use.

We cannot go totally decentralised, we must need to use centralized places to be recognised in the decentralised world even through an alias. And most important, we need centralized apps as a medium to grow the decentralised platforms that are not recognised to the level of extent we want them to reach. It's been over a decade since we are in crypto, but tell me one decentralised exchange that is being used highly over centralized ones eg. Binance. The decentralised exchanges like uniswap charge too high in fees for each transaction, be it approving a token or swapping one or even transfers. That is just one reason as an example that why people don't prefer decentralised platforms over centralized.

If you talk about features, yes, it's very evident that there is a very big difference in that sector when compared between a centralized exchange and a DEX, because a DEX is most commonly just used for swapping cryptocurrencies back and forth and there aren't a lot of other options available to it, while a centralized exchange provides a whole lot of features and tools for its users.

Also, they don't really have the same pros and cons since there is a very big difference between them, a centralized exchange will surely have more pros and cons than a decentralized exchange since a DEX has very limited features.

Not totally suprising when it comes to the masses would go along on whats the current trending or where do most people do go, doesnt mind if they wouldnt really be that anonymous or something that do talks about decentralization or other stuff. Its not shocking that people would go along into those traditional things, as long they arent doing something bad then they wouldnt mind if their information would really be known and exposed.

One thing here is about on social media on which most of their life happenings and events are even posted which we know that this is really a security risks on where letting the public
see on whats happening into your life but since we are on a digital era then it turns out to be that so casual.

I believe when each region of the world has implemented, and deployed their systems for CBDC, more and more people will learn, THE HARD WAY, that there is a place for a decentralized cryptocurrency in their lives as a back up. It will be an issue among ALL the masses, and then I'm very confident that Bitcoin will be something of high valuable that what it is today. It will not be a "Criminal Coin" but a "Freedom Coin".

Once the people know and feel the effects of decentralization, they will support it but right now that there's few discussion that's layman friendly, I think this kind of stuff is still out of their mind. No need to worry though as the people are easily persuaded especially if they can benefit from it greatly.

Ordinary people only need specific guidance on every thing they consider new and when they begin to properly digest the advantages and disadvantages that exist in the things they consider new, they will make their own decisions in terms of using them or not because they also need to feel what are the good and bad effects after using the decentralized system that they consider new. And I don't think that's a problem because over time ordinary people will also get used to it when a decentralized system has been used by many people all over the world.

people is actually care about decentralization, but they also have to use centralized so it will be side by side in a system.
Decentralization refers to the distribution of power, decision-making, and resources away from a central authority or organization and towards individual participants or smaller groups. It is an important concept in various fields, including politics, economics, and technology.

people care about decentralization but people also can't be separated from centralization, because it's needed, the central system is not completely bad, and the decentralized system is not completely good either, I mean there must be flaws in each system.

Correct. If the knowledge of decentralization has reached everyone. So I'm pretty sure they will all understand and the majority will support a decentralized system. But the concern is that even today there are still many who do not realize that the system they are currently using is a centralized system. And there are still many who don't know what a centralized system and a non-centralized system are. Even today, the majority of people are not aware that they are being watched by a centralized system. and when people start to wake up to this. then everyone will start to be interested in following the decentralized system. I used to be like that. In fact, there are still very few people who know bitcoin at this time. the majority only among young people who know. so it is natural that the current bitcoin adoption that adheres to a decentralized system is still small. but I believe that in the next generation Decentralization will be most sought after. they will realize that privacy is important.

It is undeniable that more people prefer to use centralized services. Because of all that, maybe because the services provided on platforms or in any field are indeed very good. That way many people become accustomed to using the service. Regarding anonymity, I think people don't really care about this, because maybe it's caused by the habits and experiences they've been through during their lifetime, most of them are used to life with an open identity. So more people are choosing openness than anonymity.

as well as accounts on existing social media such as on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and tiktok. Most of these people are all open in identity. So now everyone is used to being open in identity.

And why are so many people currently choosing centralized services, that's probably because the first service or platform that comes to the top has a centralized system, so people will automatically join in.

People's interest on decentralization is really not definite. It would vary depending on how interested they are in it. Some people may be very passionate and interested about the idea of decentralization and see it as a major component of a fair and just society, while others may be more skeptical of its benefits and prefer more centralized system. Whether or not people care about the decentralization it would still depend on each and every individual including their personal values and experiences, and beliefs about the role of the government and other institutions in society.

It's because aside from most people are already accustomed to such system, people also find it too annoying to deal on their own finances only adding to their problems like they needed to think were they will put that money to be secure enough or if they should spend it into something valuable and many more things to think about. As the banks existed solely to hold their money, it is already a load lifted off of their chests and they can focus on other things such as working to add more money while the banks are "promising" like interest rates annually.

Also, although I agree with you that people seems too lazy to rely on their own capabilities in regards of financial management, some also won't choose things that they think it is risky when they knew that their are other option they can choosw in which they can play it safe.

Confession time: I'm on the fence here. Centralized services? I get it. They offer smooth sailing and seamless experiences. Why wrestle with finances when life's adventures beckon? However, depending on these centralized behemoths? Long-term peril, folks. If they stumble or fall prey to cyber pirates, will people be marooned, bereft of funds and data? The golden mean? Harmonize convenience with fortification. Aim for systems both user-friendly and impervious, granting access to all while shielding them like a clandestine vault.

I think more and more they are losing their decentralized features like many exchange platforms that require KYC to use it even though we know that decentralization runs entirely by the system and doesn't need it. but they don't care about the decentralized nature of it but it is a rule made by the government in their country for the safety of their investors. even so there is still a similar uniswap which symbolizes it is a decentralized platform therefore we can still remain anonymous even when transacting it just requires a little higher gas fees.

I think it's mostly a habit because these centralized systems have been around for hundreds of years, and it has also served us for hundreds of years. While the concept of decentralization or anonymity has only been noticed in recent years since bitcoin was created. So it is very difficult for everyone to change and move to decentralization in a short time.

And I also agree with you on one more thing, self-preservation of assets is considered a burden, and they won't have time to do other things, so they will find a place where they feel safe enough to deposit money, and that's the bank.
Overall, banks are created and exist because of human need, so as long as people still have old habits and thoughts, the centralized system will still rule our world.