This argument is predicated on the unexamined assumption that POS is a drop-in replacement for POW, providing equal or better (a) security and (b) economics. False on both points.
Yes, and Bitcoin has thrived since then! Decentralization for the win. Who needs a centralized foundation?
I do recognize that in today’s environment, startup coins perforce need to start with some centralization. I do hope that over time, ECC and ZF could bootstrap the ecosystem to the point that it can achieve greater decentralization. I think that some of the principals there would probably love that; they are idealists about this kind of thing—sometimes even too much so, in my opinion.
That is a fancy way of saying that Bitcoin is truly decentralized: No one party can control it, so yes, there are always many irreconcilably conflicting interests trying to pull it in all different directions. Thanks for agreeing with me.
The so-called “Bitcoin Foundation” was irredeemably corrupt. Its continued organizational viability would have destroyed Bitcoin to the point that I would have become an activist against Bitcoin. Good riddance.
Imagine how much more robust Zcash will be, if someday it can grow to the point that it does not need any centralized entities of such a nature! It is a dream I’d be willing to work for.