Good article.
I would proffer this however: It may not be either/or ... it may be a hybrid. There are a number of up-and-coming STEEM/Steemit competitors (Mind.com, Narrative, etc.) that are combining centralized and decentralized systems.
As we've discovered on STEEM/Steemit, an alternative term for 'decentralization' is "utter chaos" ... fitting, as the underlying ideology of cryptocurrencies is 'anarchism.'
No Rulers, No Rules has lead to systemic vote-buying/selling, no focus or concentration of force ... and no generally accepted plan (or even a common vision of the goals of the blockchain).
In all honesty, 98% of Steemians couldn't give a shit about centralization/decentralization beyond what is technically required to prevent security breaches. They just want a social media platform where they get paid to create and curate.
'Overthrowing governmental control' is the ideological claptrap of zealots and has precisely zero chance of working ... which may explain why anarchism has never been implemented anywhere, in any time frame, in all of history.
I pray for institutional investors to get in here and take over (completely sidelining the 20- and 30-something Whales, Witnesses and Dev's that think they understand how life works because they can write Python).
These guys have no sense of priorities ... STEEM is under $0.30 and barely in the Top 60 cryptocurrencies ... perchance it's time to re-evaluate assumptions.
No ... ideologues are NEVER capable of re-evaluation. Their Utopian Dream has become a religion and talk of compromise ... a blasphemy.
Quill
Despite the unpopularity of this idea with the zealots, I do agree with you. We are going to see some sort of melding, too much of one of another thing is always terrible. There has been too much of a swing to decentralisation as an ideal, perhaps the coming year will see a bit of a correction!