Ah I see, you consider the current PoS systems that rely on getting the initial state for a new client from some trusted source to be "centralized". Yes, this is going to be the big debate in the cryptocurrency space for the near future I think. (Though you'd probably argue there's no debate, because someone disagreeing with your position isn't a "real researcher".)
No, that component is just broken. If anyone trusted is a bad actor and gives you a bad blockchain, you are not in consensus, thus any system using this cannot be considered a consensus system. The centralization I was referring to was other mechanisms commonly employed by PoS systems.
>Though you'd probably argue there's no debate, because someone disagreeing with your position isn't a "real researcher".
No, someone not doing real research isn't a real researcher. Someone who understands consensus and security (not Vitelik) and creates a paper describing a system and its security model clearly is a real researcher.
It isn't my fault that that hasn't happened yet.
If anyone trusted is a bad actor and gives you a bad [BITCOIN WALLET CLIENT], you are not in consensus, thus [BITCOIN] cannot be considered a consensus system.