3 ms·
This may be an overblown response, but I can't help to give my opinion about centralisation. I think the web is decentralised, but has never been that centralis
by alex_duf 9y ago
This may be an overblown response, but I can't help to give my opinion about centralisation. I think the web is decentralised, but has never been that centralised. What I'm about to say is about the Internet in a broader meaning, but applies to the web just as well.
A few actors own most of the servers (aws, google, ovh, azure), a few actors own most of the personal data (google, facebook, amazon) and a few actors own the pipes to transfer the data between users and the above service (depends on the country, but on average 3 to 4 provider per country, often the same across borders). The fact CDNs are spread geographically has no impact on the balance of centralisation, as what matter - in my opinion - isn't about geographical distribution, but about power or ownership distribution.
It's also very vertical due to the way we consume it (think asymmetrical bandwidth). We mostly depend on someone else's computer, or someone else's service, and has nothing to do with the utopic beginnings of the web when people were self-hosting their content on their machines.
An example would be streaming: we only download stuff from Netflix or Youtube, when technologies like Bittorrent or webtorrent could be leveraged to limit the reliance on one actor. Technologically these actors aren't really single points of failure as they've learned to be reliable, but it's a matter of who has control over the Internet.
- JumpCrisscross 9y ago> A few actors own most of the servers OP is measuring on a graph where each node is a server. You are measuring on a graph where each node is a person. "De-centralisation" can usefully apply to both. The former measures resilience against technical risks. The latter against sociopolitical risks.
- alex_duf 9y agoYes, that is exactly my point (but maybe a bit verbose and convoluted :) )