---ETA--- Although again none of the concerns below are necessarily anarchy specific nor do they necessarily (this is a statement of hypothetical, not a statem

---ETA--- Although again none of the concerns below are necessarily anarchy specific nor do they necessarily (this is a statement of hypothetical, not a statement of fact: as far as I know we have no data in any direction about anything) have an significant effect on software development when compared to almost any other concern, source of friction or limitation --- I'm at best anarchist adjacent in as much as the circles I run in are concerned so I am not the one to diagnose them all (and there's an enormous variety of them) But I would suspect that they see history as pointing to centralized architectures as significantly more vulnerable to being corrupted/controlled. And in many cases unauditable or unaccountable until it is too late (lavabit seems relevant here). In addition to that vulnerability centralization puts broad power in concentrated hands which is kind of a necessary precondition for hierarchy and it easier to head things off at the pass then start down the slope and hope people don't succumb to momentum. And worrying about architecture need have no effect on non-network oriented software, which outside of communication software is basically all of it if you haven't drank the SaaS koolaid.