主要洞察：
- THORChain states that having hundreds of stake participant that proposes and attests to blocks using bonded collateral.">validators can still mask centralized control.
- A two-thirds majority of THORChain nodes must approve the majority of governance and code changes.
- Expanding the validator set can distribute control more broadly, but it also splits protocol income among more nodes.
Chad Barraford, co-founder of THORChain, has asserted that a blockchain can feature hundreds of stake participant that proposes and attests to blocks using bonded collateral.">validators yet remain centralized via shared infrastructure and common operators.
The network contends that validator metrics mean little unless those participants function independently and can join without restrictions. Its perspective centers on who actually governs stake participant that proposes and attests to blocks using bonded collateral.">validators, infrastructure, data access, smart contracts, protocol modifications, and overall control.
Furthermore, the network notes that hidden points of control can persist within architectures that otherwise utilize decentralized blockchain systems.
THORChain 质疑将验证者数量作为去中心化衡量标准
该协议将验证者独立性作为中心化如何隐匿于网络之中的典型例证。它指出，如果数百个验证者由相同的实体在相同的数据中心运行，那么它们提供的安全保障微乎其微。
此外，受限的验证者入驻流程可能会集中权力，即便网络拥有很高的验证者总数。因此，该项目更看重公开参与和运营商的独立性，而不是单纯的验证者数量。
在该网络概述的框架下，同样的逻辑也适用于数据访问和基础设施。例如，一个社交媒体平台可能会将数据记录在链上，但却依赖于仅由其最初创建者控制的 API。
Those developers retain the ability to filter information, limit access, or switch off the primary gateway entirely. In that scenario, decentralized storage fails to strip control away from the centralized API tier.
当提案结果完全依赖于活跃投票率时，治理机制就会引入另一个集中影响力的途径。参与度低下可能会导致一小部分代币持有者对最终结果施加巨大的影响力。
The referenced example features a founder holding a substantial token balance who sways a proposal via that sizeable stake. According to THORChain, true decentralization must therefore be evaluated across the entire ecosystem rather than through a single visible element.
节点对协议升级拥有最终决定权
该协议通过以节点采用为核心的机制，将软件工程与最终的协议授权分离开来。任何社区成员都可以自由提交架构决策记录（ADR），同时由开发人员编写相应的代码。
Subsequently, nodes decide whether to run the proposed software and embrace the network update. Most governance proposals and software updates demand approval from two-thirds of the nodes prior to implementation.
这种设置防止了开发人员强迫节点安装补丁或在违背其意愿的情况下接受修改。虽然当技术紧急情况需要全网修复和协调软件部署时，这种结构可能会减慢反应时间，但它
这种延迟是要求独立节点在升级上线前仔细审查并背书的直接结果。该网络将这种方法与那些能够由紧凑小团更快恢复系统功能的平台进行了对比。
验证者数量增长带来的经济与协调权衡： THORChain
THORChain 认为，扩大验证者集合是一项经济与技术上的折中，而非简单的直接升级。更大的验证者名册可以进一步分散控制权，但它同时也会将协议收入分摊给更多的运营商。
Furthermore, a higher number of participants complicates the consensus-building process across the network. Although the system could theoretically leverage inflation to subsidize more validators, doing so would dilute the value held by existing RUNE holders.
相反，正如源材料中所述，节点参与度会根据协议产生的自然收入进行自然调整。
常见问题
为什么 THORChain 认为数百个验证者并不能保证去中心化？
THORChain 解释说，大量的验证者仍然可以由相同的实体从相同的数据中心运行，或者通过不公开的流程进行挑选，从而掩盖了中心化的控制。
THORChain 上的代码更新是如何获得批准的？
代码更新和治理提案在被采纳之前，需要获得独立网络节点三分之二多数的批准。
扩大验证者集合的权衡是什么？
增加更多验证者分散了控制权，但这也将协议收入分配给更多运营商，并增加了达成全网一致所需的协调工作。
