[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Distributed protocols that combat economy of scale
- To: [email protected]
- Subject: Distributed protocols that combat economy of scale
- From: [email protected] (agave)
- Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2016 16:52:13 -0500
- In-reply-to: <10061069.QLp78G3N7N@lapuntu>
- References: <3928149.NAsv7Jq6H8@lapuntu> <20160306112054.3ca17154@bristlecone> <10061069.QLp78G3N7N@lapuntu>
On Sun, 06 Mar 2016 22:13:41 +0100
rysiek <[email protected]> wrote:
> It's not centralized in a way Facebook is, for example. While e-mail
> was obviously never a p2p system, it was not a centralized system.
> The idea was decentralized, federated among *many* servers.
>
Oh, I see what you mean.
> Such was also the idea in BitCoin. As we can see, there's a secondary
> (not protocol-level) centralisation happening there. Cartels emerge,
> because economy of scale makes them viable, and indeed profitable.
>
Hmm, I'm not sure if there's any particular way to solve that problem
for BitCoin. I can't imagine any ways of establishing consensus among a
completely decentralized protocol other than by popular consensus of
the participants, and popular consensus can be manipulated easily as the
post you mentioned shows. Maybe decentralization ought to be left to
communications only?