At some point, the industry started replacing 'peer-to-peer (no central authority)' with 'decentralized.' They replaced 'The p2p cryptocurrency' with 'Crypto currency.' Once you substitute the axiom of Bitcoin's P2P with 'Decentralized,' everything changes. P2P is no central authority; it is complete decentralization. But 'decentralized' is a verb state—anything that surpasses a single centralized entity can be considered decentralized. So, people started thinking about innovations like BFT and POS. Not saying this is wrong—it’s at least a trust code under a cooperative game theory model, which is Blockchain technology. What I’m saying is: this is not P2P (peer-to-peer), not a no-central-authority business, not within the scope of BTC's P2P cryptocurrency business, and not within the framework of Bitcoin technology. If you don’t take P2P as the axiomatic starting point, you’re avoiding the double-spending problem from the get-go, turning it into an algorithmic model based on Turing machine theory. This is a completely different axiomatic starting point from Bitcoin. As a result, the level of trustlessness achieved is on a completely different scale.