Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [decentralization] p2p working group/standards

Expand Messages
  • Clay Shirky
    ... We are right about empowerment, and they are right about subversion, because ___1___ Empowerment = Control ... While there has been and will continue to
    Message 1 of 55 , Feb 13, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      > While those of us who use P2P technology see it as empowering, many
      > enterprises see it as subversive.

      We are right about empowerment, and they are right about subversion,
      because
      ___1___
      Empowerment = Control

      > By pulling together a working group to explore the P2P issues more
      > specifically and begin to educate the market, we'll have a better
      > chance of introducing this technology into the enterprise.

      While there has been and will continue to be lots of industry adoption
      of things like Groove and Data Synapse, there is also another axis
      into the enterprise: the back door. Instant Messaging was the first
      business communications application brought into the enterprise one
      user at a time, but it won't be the last.

      The historic consensus is that you can do whatever you like with your
      own computer, but creating a network address requires deployment of
      some powerful juju. Now that ICQ and Napster have upended that, by
      giving ordinary users the ability to create permanent, human readable
      network addresses in 5 minutes, without requiring them to ask for
      either help or permission, we may be in a situation analogous to the
      arrival of the PC, where the entrprises were the last ones to come to
      the party.

      > As Ben Franklin said -- if we don't hang together, we'll all hang
      > separately.

      And I think it was either Sun Yat-Sen or Billy the Kid who said "A
      false sense of consensus creates arbitrary constraints on the range of
      available options."

      We are some contentious motherfuckers. Hanging together would make
      sense if there was some pure thing to gravitate towards, but I still
      swing between wanting to make Dave Winer Pope of User Empowerment and
      wanting to have him killed, so I think its a bit early to be hanging
      together.

      -clay
    • Ben Houston
      ... Probably going to SHA-1 isn t too big of a problem. I ll bring it up with those that I know. Interestingly, there are ways to add file hashes within the
      Message 55 of 55 , Feb 20, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Justin Chapweske said:
        > ... switch to SHA-1.
        >
        > The biggest group that I havn't yet talked to about this is the Gnutella
        > guys, but I'm sure they'd be into it as well. Any Gnutellians on the
        > list?

        Probably going to SHA-1 isn't too big of a problem. I'll bring it up with
        those that I know. Interestingly, there are ways to add file hashes within
        the existing protocol specifications - it should even be backwards
        compatible.

        Cheers,
        -ben houston
        http://www.exocortex.org/~ben
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.