Redecentralize

decentralization A functionally decentralized (networked) system is one that permits its parts to communicate directly without involving a third party translator or intermediary. (3) Physical decentralization A physically decentralized system is one that is distributed and robust from a physical point of view. Its parts can be split, moved around /...\ Here are some examples: (1) Wikipedia would be an example of a system that is fairly politically decentralized but is NOT functionally or physically decentralized. (2) A flat IP network (one with no NAT or discriminating inline firewalls) would present a functionally decentralized system. Any computer on this network /...\ same ISP or if the network had single point of failure bottlenecks, so such a system may not necessarily be politically or physically decentralized. (3) A meshnet would probably be the ultimate example here, but for an exclusive one I think Google's data center network would qualify. Google

running a public one, and then the server can be downloaded and self-administered for the super hard-core. I agree physical decentralization isn't important enough for most Web users to prioritize this early in the game, but we can make our way toward it incrementally /...\ infrastructure decentralization. #3 is sort of a philosophical point. Basically I think it's more important to enable later al communication functionally than to physically decentralize the network. I'm not saying the latter isn't important... just that it's a lot harder to achieve and has little value /...\ former. If nobody is developing peer to peer apps that really leverage an operationally decentralized network, then if we did create a truly physically decentralized network there would be no "killer apps" for it. It wouldn't go anywhere. This is why one of my goals with this project

running a public one, and then the server can be downloaded and self-administered for the super hard-core. I agree physical decentralization isn't important enough for most Web users to prioritize this early in the game, but we can make our way toward it incrementally /...\ infrastructure decentralization. #3 is sort of a philosophical point. Basically I think it's more important to enable later al communication functionally than to physically decentralize the network. I'm not saying the latter isn't important... just that it's a lot harder to achieve and has little value /...\ former. If nobody is developing peer to peer apps that really leverage an operationally decentralized network, then if we did create a truly physically decentralized network there would be no "killer apps" for it. It wouldn't go anywhere. This is why one of my goals with this project

running a public one, and then the server can be downloaded and self-administered for the super hard-core. I agree physical decentralization isn't important enough for most Web users to prioritize this early in the game, but we can make our way toward it incrementally /...\ infrastructure decentralization. #3 is sort of a philosophical point. Basically I think it's more important to enable later al communication functionally than to physically decentralize the network. I'm not saying the latter isn't important... just that it's a lot harder to achieve and has little value /...\ former. If nobody is developing peer to peer apps that really leverage an operationally decentralized network, then if we did create a truly physically decentralized network there would be no "killer apps" for it. It wouldn't go anywhere. This is why one of my goals with this project

running a public one, and then the server can be downloaded and self-administered for the super hard-core. I agree physical decentralization isn't important enough for most Web users to prioritize this early in the game, but we can make our way toward it incrementally /...\ infrastructure decentralization. #3 is sort of a philosophical point. Basically I think it's more important to enable later al communication functionally than to physically decentralize the network. I'm not saying the latter isn't important... just that it's a lot harder to achieve and has little value /...\ former. If nobody is developing peer to peer apps that really leverage an operationally decentralized network, then if we did create a truly physically decentralized network there would be no "killer apps" for it. It wouldn't go anywhere. This is why one of my goals with this project

running a public one, and then the server can be downloaded and self-administered for the super hard-core. I agree physical decentralization isn't important enough for most Web users to prioritize this early in the game, but we can make our way toward it incrementally /...\ infrastructure decentralization. #3 is sort of a philosophical point. Basically I think it's more important to enable later al communication functionally than to physically decentralize the network. I'm not saying the latter isn't important... just that it's a lot harder to achieve and has little value /...\ former. If nobody is developing peer to peer apps that really leverage an operationally decentralized network, then if we did create a truly physically decentralized network there would be no "killer apps" for it. It wouldn't go anywhere. This is why one of my goals with this project

store and walking out with someone > else's material property today. > Well, that's the point: "intellectual property" is not physical property. Only a fool would sustain that their ideas and intellectual capacity comes out of the blue. As Isaac Newton famously wrote /...\ authorship rights to patent laws. It would be akin to say that a fence, a kitchen, and a book belong to the same "physical property". RT2>I guess I forgot that IP was such a loaded term. Sorry I introduced it into the discussion. Certainly what /...\ submit, though, that there is such a thing as real contribution to knowledge that is not combinatorial. Do you feel then that not-physical property is an oxymoron? /RT2> > my way of thinking as a psycholinguist > I don't have the pleasure to know the field

tunneling for use behind tough firewalls. In development: new web site that is less ugly & easier to use, support for bridging to physical Ethernet networks for seamless physical-to-virtual Ethernet extension (think "virtual wire from physical switch to virtual switch in P2P-space"). Also will start charging

store and walking out with > someone else's material property today. > Well, that's the point: "intellectual property" is not physical property. Only a fool would sustain that their ideas and intellectual capacity comes out of the blue. As Isaac Newton famously wrote /...\ authorship rights to patent laws. It would be akin to say that a fence, a kitchen, and a book belong to the same "physical property". > my way of thinking as a psycholinguist > I don't have the pleasure to know the field of psycholinguistics /...\ what you can do with "your own", legally purchased items and "intellectual property". Digital contents pose different issues than physical objects, and certainly something must be done to enable content (and software) producers to receive fair payment for their work. But I don't think limiting

tunneling for use behind tough firewalls. In development: new web site that is less ugly & easier to use, support for bridging to physical Ethernet networks for seamless physical-to-virtual Ethernet extension (think "virtual wire from physical switch to virtual switch in P2P-space"). Also will start

than infrastructure decentralization. #3 is sort of a philosophical point. Basically I think it's more important to enable lateral communication functionally than to physically decentralize the network. I'm not saying the latter isn't important... just that it's a lot harder to achieve and has little value /...\ former. If nobody is developing peer to peer apps that really leverage an operationally decentralized network, then if we did create a truly physically decentralized network there would be no "killer apps" for it. It wouldn't go anywhere. This is why one of my goals with this project /...\ example, if we were on a functionally decentralized network I could type: ping <your IP address> ... and directly ping your box. Physical decentralization means that no central point of failure exists... that I can ping your box regardless of whether someone somewhere else turns off their system. Obviously

behind tough > firewalls. > > In development: new web site that is less ugly & easier to use, > support for bridging to physical Ethernet networks for seamless > physical-to-virtual Ethernet extension (think "virtual wire from > physical switch to virtual switch in P2P-space

BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, There's lots of interesting things going on but we're all so (physically) far apart. For example, I live in the middle-of-nowhere rural England and, earlier this week, Francis was in Liverpool (miles away from me) giving a talk about /...\ just have to read Plato's dialogues to understand that the Ancient Greeks had this concept nailed. Ergo, what can we do to bring physically remote people together to share interesting ideas..? How about something like an http://appear.in/redecentralize_symposium call with an advertised subject matter, someone recording the proceedings

voices. Each of us speaks, writes, walks and drives in ways that are ours alone. What’s purely personal is clear in the physical world. In the networked world, however, it is not — and this is a problem that needs fixing. For example, there was a time when /...\ those graces. (So does your GoPro camera.) We have none of them with our smart mobile devices today. Not yet, anyway. Books in the physical world are first person technologies as well. Digital ones we “buy” from Amazon are not, because they come with leashes. Eben asks

voices. Each of us speaks, writes, walks and drives in ways that are ours alone. What’s purely personal is clear in the physical world. In the networked world, however, it is not — and this is a problem that needs fixing. For example, there was a time when /...\ those graces. (So does your GoPro camera.) We have none of them with our smart mobile devices today. Not yet, anyway. Books in the physical world are first person technologies as well. Digital ones we “buy” from Amazon are not, because they come with leashes. Eben asks

attributed & ensured by a legal system") is a virtual property (as in "being an attribute not having a physical component"). To decentralize therefore needs (among other things) a) a component to model a legal system and b) use (a) to model property c) make sure that /...\ tied to physical devices d) provide proofs of (b) sufficient complete and obvious to be useful as evidence in a court case. (The (d) I added because we better reject the idea of a pure machine-supported "proof" as applicable to humans for moral reasons

makes it quite difficult to follow. The "> " prefix is something most email software understand. > Do you feel then that not-physical property is an oxymoron? > What I feel about it is seldom interesting to this discussion. However I can tell you that private property

about the point where app development became kinda confusing in our context.  After all the server is virtually there even though physically not. (Another - related - confusion might be interesting to readers looking at it from a legal background: in such a network new objects are created

This make both replication and verification conceptually simple. It is > not necessary to trust any > devices you do not have in your physical control. Same here. Up to not trusting any single device outside your trust set with the update process. > > I think this will

That's about the point where app development became kinda confusing in our context. After all the server is virtually there even though physically not. (Another - related - confusion might be interesting to readers looking at it from a legal background: in such a network new objects are created

with the Enlightenment, we have a tendency to reduce the picture of > the world to support our totalitarian claims.  If Newtonian physics > works most of the time, we've known for a Century already that it does > not in all cases

cc46c0c8456d]       All jokes aside, this is sure to be a seminal moment in Decentralization   history. Intellectually, Physically, and Metaphysically, we will tear the   roof off all ethereal "limitations" and actualize the most intense   instantiation of Doge Consciousness

with the Enlightenment, we have a tendency to reduce the picture of > the world to support our totalitarian claims. If Newtonian physics > works most of the time, we've known for a Century already that it does > not in all cases. But the reductionist world view still

complication wrt. DHT design. ;-) Now we know that I have one copy of all data I *really* care about which I can physically secure. At this point we can ask how we may update automated agents. Sometimes they might just have a single owner, but often control

design. ;-) > > Now we know that I have one copy of all data I *really* care about > which I can physically secure. > > At this point we can ask how we may update automated agents. > Sometimes they might just have a single owner, but often control

with the Enlightenment, we have a tendency to reduce the > picture of > > the world to support our totalitarian claims. If Newtonian physics > > works most of the time, we've known for a Century already that it does > > not in all cases

understand you "vaguely similar".  It seems not to be that vague.  It's just a different "machine" executing it: physical hardware or human agents.  But both are supposed to stick precisely to the rules until the software is changed.  (And both are usually buggy

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with

understand you "vaguely similar".  It seems not to be that vague.  It's just a different "machine" executing it: physical hardware or human agents.  But both are supposed to stick precisely to the rules until the software is changed.  (And both

understand you "vaguely similar".  It seems not to be that vague.  It's just a different "machine" executing it: physical hardware or human agents.  But both are supposed to stick precisely to the rules until the software is changed.  (And both are usually buggy

makes it quite difficult to follow. The "> " prefix is something most email software understand. > Do you feel then that not-physical property is an oxymoron? > What I feel about it is seldom interesting to this discussion. However I can tell you that private property

since Descartes and with the Enlightenment, we have a tendency to reduce the picture of the world to support our totalitarian claims. If Newtonian physics works most of the time, we've known for a Century already that it does not in all cases. But the reductionist world view still

over convenience. This make both replication and verification conceptually simple. It is not necessary to trust any devices you do not have in your physical control. I think this will be enough to implement "web 2.0" style "social" applications such as twitter. Maybe not as convenient

with the Enlightenment, we have a tendency to reduce the picture of the world to support our totalitarian claims.  If Newtonian physics works most of the time, we've known for a Century already that it does not in all cases.  But the reductionist world view