7172Re: [decentralization] directional motion
- May 17, 2014This thread makes for depressing reading.So just what are we all going to do about it?On May 17, 2014, at 9:56, Patrik Wallstrom pawal@... [decentralization] <email@example.com> wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2014, Clay Shirky clay@... [decentralization] wrote:
> > Maybe there was a finite opening phase in computing, where standards
> drove the
> > agenda and ideals of decentralization were widely shared.
> And we know when it ended -- http and HTML were the last two important
> standards worked out before people had an idea of how much money was at
> stake. The very next set of protocols -- chat, starting with ICQ -- have
> not settled on a single set of open standards to this day, leaving things
> like Addium to rety to reverse-engineer interoperability.
Yes, chat has never been a success with distributed and standardization.
SMTP has been destroyed by spam. Even though we can pretend it is a
distributed protocol, the current trend is also going towards
centralization. Smaller e-mail operators have an increasingly hard time
to deliver e-mail to the big operators, largely because the increasing
complexity handling the spam protection mechanisms. And also, the
customers seems to like it, jumping on the centralized servers - they
are very good at fightning spam!
So I guess we have largely lost the spam wars, just being happy to
have the e-mail giants fight it for us.
If XMPP ever gains popularity over the other chat protocols, my
suspicion is that it will also go the same direction as SMTP. A large
amount of users attracts spam - and spam fighting will make the
services centralize to gain strength.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>