0

Smart contracts like USDT can arbitrarily blacklist addresses. What happened to decentralization now?

EVM is decentralized due to the way it works, but the applications within it violate decentralization.

user
  • 1
  • 2

2 Answers2

1

Some smart contracts abdicate of a level of centralisation in order to gain some other advantage. However many are fully decentralised. It's up to the user to do his own research and choose whatever he wants.

IBeFrogs
  • 63
  • 6
  • Does transferring ownership of a smart contract to address(0) mean we can trust the contract? – user Feb 18 '24 at 11:57
  • 1
    It means you can trust that the owner of the contract is no one, meaning that feature is now decentralised. However it can still have other centralisation vectors. – IBeFrogs Feb 18 '24 at 12:09
  • Transferring ownership does not mean anything if this is not reviewed in the context of all smart contract code. – Mikko Ohtamaa Feb 18 '24 at 12:49
0

Smart contracts like USDT can arbitrarily blacklist addresses. What happened to decentralization now?

You are free to use non-USDT smart contracts that do not have such centralised power. Nobody forces you to use USDT if you do not like this.

Mikko Ohtamaa
  • 22,269
  • 6
  • 62
  • 127