Centralized vs Decentralized part1

I have been thinking about this whole notion of decentralized network, how perfect they r and how disruptive they are? I am pondering myself with questions. Decentralization comes with lot of benefits, its create p2p network or a new network solving each problem

1. A pure decentralized organization needs self regulating rules, participants are rewarded and who violate will be punished automatically. Does human behavior fit well into this structure? From ancient days it was always leaders and followers for human race.Decentralized society a new social experiment?

2. In a traditional company , group of people with an idea come together, many times raises investor money ,develop product,grow and issue shares to the public (public owns the company now).Share holders have elected official,the board who keeps an eye on the company. The management runs the day to day activities of the company.Many times there are centralized figures who chart out a product road map and strategy and company is managed to achieve the results in the most profitable ways

3)In decentralized world, group of people with an idea come together, gets an ICO done, selling crypto tokens to the share holders? .Does the network participants take the above role of company management? isn't still a central figure associated with the company driving the vision? Who chart out features for next product release?What if participants disagree.I compared steem with these questions and found that witness play a major role in atleast adopting a new release and if there is huge divergence possibly can split the network . is crypto currency represent the share equivalent? Does any such company later can go to public markets? I donot know the answer!!! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptoshare

About the crypto tokens issued
" these tokens are not like stock certificates, which represent ownership but have no real use. App-tokens are actually used in the network to participate. In the file-storage market example, they are used to prove file ownership and buy and sell storage space. The founder of the network keeps roughly 10 percent of the tokens for themselves and their founding team, and if their network becomes popular, the demand for tokens rises, and because the supply of the token is fixed, the price increases. This means that founders can monetize their networks directly by simply holding their tokens and making the network useful. If they need liquidity to continue funding the project, they can simply sell the tokens on the open market.

In addition to rewarding founders, these app-tokens allow participants in networks to actually own a piece of the network. This network equity ownership is unprecedented. Consider how many networks the modern western internet user is a part of — Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Uber, Airbnb, eBay, Etsy, Tumblr — the list goes on. In each of these cases, the network’s value is created by the users, but the value each individual user generates goes to the owners of the network. In this new blockchain-based model, that value is actually given back to the users of the network, proportional to their contribution."
referenced from ->
https://techcrunch.com/2017/01/08/the-future-is-a-decentralized-internet/

lets say to majority(debatable) of share holders or crypto token holders, they are passive investors, to them both looks the same isn't?

My thoughts are we are still in very early days of experiment and we may finally conclude that taking a middle of the road approach might be the best solution

1. Banks ,governments and other institutions may go for private block chains
2. Many B2B may choose Ethereum/EOS or similar networks
3. B2C might use graphene or similar due to low cost of participation (steemit)
4. Bitcoin becomes a digital value holder->the new digital gold