"What's more, huge classes of users remain categorically opposed to the very
tenets on which the DVCS systems are based. They need centralization. They
need control. They need meaningful path-based authorization. They need
simplicity. In short, they desperately need Subversion."
Interesting requirement analysis - but, I think, the wrong conclusion. There is nothing preventing a "centralized" DVCS setup (indeed, most DVCS project have the concept of a "primary" repository), implementing path-based authorization, or using just a "simple" subset of its features.
The opposition comes from fear of change or misunderstandings (namely, the perception that all the DVCS features need to be used or understood in all scenarios), and from clinging to outdated past; it's like the initial resistance to SVN adoption when CVS/SCCS were still around.