1820Re: [decentralization] Re: P2P Transparency - making easy connections
- Mar 15, 2001on 15/03/01 11:55am, lsmith@... (lsmith@...) wrote:
> --- In decentralization@y..., Clay Shirky <clay@s...> wrote:Peer purity (peerity?) jihads aside, I just think I ain't gonna work if one
>>> technically, this solves nothing. This makes it not peer_to_peer.
>> This is "peerier than thou" thinking. The phrase peer-to-peer arose
>> *after* the applications it was meant to describe -- Napster, SETI,
>> ICQ, et al -- so P2P is a label, not a definition. If "peer-to-
>> doesn't strike you as a good word for what Ray is up to, use a
>> different word.
> I was so glad when Clay (first?) said that at the O'Reilly
> Conference. To combat "peerier-than-thou-ness" within myself I repeat
> my new mantra "P2P is a mindset, not a technology". Groove is a
> collaboration platform that happens to be p2p. Napster is/was a file-
> sharing network that happens to be p2p. We make distributed
> information infrastructure that happens to be p2p. Repeat.
company decides that they're going to provide an essential service for a
toll. pay-for-play connection brokering is goofy, but don't know where the
alternative answer lies; perhaps NAT-2-NAT will (someday) be addressed at
the stack level.
business development & strategic relationships
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>