I'm not sure if you're taking the piss or what.

But my argument is that a decentralized ledger is verified by many parties openly. That's the first part.

The second part is about verification - to ACCEPT a decentralized system where we don't have to TRUST the banks are doing it right, we need to verify.

The 2008 example is about the corruption, the trust, and lack of verification that screwed over many people.

The same shit happens now on blockchains because people need to (but don't) VERIFY. So when a new "on-chain" company starts whatever "crypto" company I'm saying THEY NEED to show people how to independently verify the mechanics of their code.

If I - a stranger - gave you an executable file and said "hey, pay me money, and run this file, and it will deposit money to you" - would you do it? NO! I would hope you wouldn't.

However, if I -a stranger- said "hey, here is this cool program I made that takes in X tokens and gives Y tokens over time based on Z events, and here is how to look at that code - here and here and here. This is what this does here. If you go to here and see this, this is why it works." You may be skeptical, but you would you would also be more likely to dig in and verify it.

So my point is that ALL the experts leading up to the mortgage crisis didn't do their due diligence. The people taking on variable rate mortgages didn't do their due diligence. Basically anybody that fucked around - found out. There were even regular people who thought they were getting a "regular" mortgage to find out they too got fucked.

All because they trusted without verifying.