3 ms·

You're talking about a distributed solution that will never happen. A centralized system will tend to behave more efficiently than a distributed system, and the

You're talking about a distributed solution that will never happen. A centralized system will tend to behave more efficiently than a distributed system, and the owners of that centralized system will undercut the distributed system at every stage. Corporatism will block any such movement via pricing, ease of use, marketing, FUD, and legislation. If you don't include corporations and governments in the model, that model will fail.

einr 8y ago
A centralized system will tend to behave more efficiently than a distributed system If that was always true, we literally would not even have the Internet. Centralized, corporate networks like TYMNET died like flies once the open, distributed Internet became widely available.
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  I'd say that Internet was a fluke. Some standards - both electrical and software - managed to spread worldwide and solidify against the opposition of the market. This was a time when being compatible with everyone else turned out to be more beneficial than trying to strike out on your own. It's important however to contemplate on the degree to which Internet is centralized - or getting centralized. As it is today, everything up to transport layer (TCP, UDP) can be considered baseline infrastructure. Very few market players are trying to mess with it, similarly to how most market doesn't mess with the voltage and frequency standards for electrical outlets in your home. But anything above TCP/UDP is up for grabs, and is becoming heavily centralized. This is the way of the market. You make money by building barriers, not bridges. And the players that make bridges only do so to tear down their competitors' barriers, so that they can replace them with their own barriers.
- falcrist 8y ago
  What? The web isn't distributed. It was built upon major trunks and backbones set up by government projects. All of your data goes through this centralized network of hubs and backbones as it travels around the internet. In the US, the infrastructure was sold to private companies (notably, several of the "baby bells") in the 90s.

einr 8y ago

A centralized system will tend to behave more efficiently than a distributed system If that was always true, we literally would not even have the Internet. Centralized, corporate networks like TYMNET died like flies once the open, distributed Internet became widely available.

TeMPOraL 8y ago
I'd say that Internet was a fluke. Some standards - both electrical and software - managed to spread worldwide and solidify against the opposition of the market. This was a time when being compatible with everyone else turned out to be more beneficial than trying to strike out on your own. It's important however to contemplate on the degree to which Internet is centralized - or getting centralized. As it is today, everything up to transport layer (TCP, UDP) can be considered baseline infrastructure. Very few market players are trying to mess with it, similarly to how most market doesn't mess with the voltage and frequency standards for electrical outlets in your home. But anything above TCP/UDP is up for grabs, and is becoming heavily centralized. This is the way of the market. You make money by building barriers, not bridges. And the players that make bridges only do so to tear down their competitors' barriers, so that they can replace them with their own barriers.
falcrist 8y ago
What? The web isn't distributed. It was built upon major trunks and backbones set up by government projects. All of your data goes through this centralized network of hubs and backbones as it travels around the internet. In the US, the infrastructure was sold to private companies (notably, several of the "baby bells") in the 90s.