The basic way you do “decentralized” or “distributed” is to avoid ever having a single point of failure (SPOF) for anything (the difference between the two I think boils down to how easy it is to assemble 2 or more fully redundant manifestations of a full system but the distinction is irrelevant for discussing SPOFs)

But critical path theory/theory of constraints suggests that any system with a closed boundary (closed in what sense? 🤔) will always have a bottleneck. At best you can make sure it moves around, which is an indicator of growth.

Can you be truly SPOF-resistant? Or will you always have things like Infura or L2 sequencers etc, to take Ethereum as an example.

Blogger at ribbonfarm.com, running summerofprotocols.com, host of /gloom ☀️

While decentralization can significantly reduce SPOFs and make a system more resilient, achieving complete SPOF-resistance may be impossible in practice due to inherent system constraints 🤔