[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Distributed protocols that combat economy of scale
- To: rysiek <[email protected]>
- Subject: Distributed protocols that combat economy of scale
- From: [email protected] (agave)
- Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2016 11:20:54 -0500
- Cc: [email protected]
- In-reply-to: <3928149.NAsv7Jq6H8@lapuntu>
- References: <3928149.NAsv7Jq6H8@lapuntu>
On Sun, 06 Mar 2016 16:41:05 +0100
rysiek <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as "A Miner Problem" shows, even a distributed, p2p solution like
> BitCoin suffers from a secondary centralisation flaw. Simply put,
> economy of scale lets the biggest player or a cartel of thoise
> basically undermine the "decentralized" part and take control over
> the network.
>
> A similar thing has happened with e-mail and GMail. GMail basically
> dictates the rules in the e-mail world, simply because they're the
> largest and have the most users. Again, economy of scale is to blame.
>
> So let me pose a question here: is it possible to design a protocol
> that does not succumb to economy of scale-based secondary
> centralisation? Is it possible to design a protocol that does not
> lend itself to economy of scale?
>
There's always things like TorChat for instant messaging and IPFS for
content distribution. There's no concept of any centralisation in
either - they're completely peer-to-peer. I'm not sure why you drew a
comparison to e-mail - it's inherently centralized, just among
several servers.