4 ms·
The author seems to be too focused on cryptocurrency and perhaps unaware of a lot of successfully decentralized protocols such as DAT, Scuttlebutt, GUN and IPFS
by nanomonkey 7y ago
The author seems to be too focused on cryptocurrency and perhaps unaware of a lot of successfully decentralized protocols such as DAT, Scuttlebutt, GUN and IPFS.
- dredmorbius 7y agoCryptocurrencies are interesting (in the context of this essay/discussion) because they're a well-known instance of a technology aimed at decentralisation, for a specific reason (to eliminate reliance on trust in the monetary system), which has to some extent succeeded, and in numerous others, failed. The points made generally (not limited to cryptocurrencies) are very well made. They parallel thinking I and others have been arriving at independently in recent years, after long swallowing the decentralised, crowdsourced, open source, distributed, mantra. I won't say that that's failed entirely. But it's definitely failed to deliver what it promised. DAT, Scuttlebutt, GUN, and IPFS have negligible take-up so far as I'm aware, and I keep reasonable tabs on the space.