Notices by rafoo@mastodon.zaclys.com

@aral

Sorry for the very long answer.

TL;DR: I claim that blockchains are topologically decentralized. But who cares? If you want to talk about them, why don't you tell what you think of them?

I think that the word "topological" is confusing. The way I understand this word in this context is that we are talking about how things are positioned in space but we are abstracting the distance between them to focus on the general way stuff are organized and connected. (1/6)

@aral
For example, a subway map shows the topology of a subway network; it does not tell you how much time you will need to travel from point A to point B nor the distance between these points but how the lines are interconnected. In that sense of the word, I would argue that a blockchain is a topologically decentralized network; blockchain nodes are free to join the p2p network by connecting to any previously connected node, sync the database, and leave. (2/6)

@aral
I guess that your point is that there are some fundamental differences between many people sharing the same database and many people sharing the same protocols and tools.

But your post is not about topology, it's not even really about decentralization, it's about democracy, freedom, and fighting against surveillance capitalism. So in my humble opinion, you have a few options to clarify your position regarding blockchains: (3/6)

@aral
- position 1, friendly comparison: blockchains are another attempt at fighting against the big web, they have technical shortcomings regarding data storage so small web follows a different approach which avoids data replication, it's always good to explore various options.

- position 2, failure: blockchains don't work and never will, we need to accept this and move our efforts toward small web. (4/6)

@aral
- position 3, danger: a strength of capitalism is its ability to absorb any form of critism, blockchains are yet another example of this and they are turning words such as "decentralization" into a semantic void. They are not fighting against the big web, they are compatible with it.

- position 4, ennemy: blockchains are a scam/ponzy/cult/whatever, they pretend to empower the people but they are designed to do the opposite, concentrate wealth and destroy the environment. (5/6)

@aral
But of course you don't have to take position! Blockchains are not the topic of your post and it's already self-contained. By taking position you would point to a disagreement with some of your readers who otherwise agreed to everything.

Thanks a lot for your article and for all the hard work you do to make this world a better place!

(6/6)

@aral
"You hear a lot of talk about blockchains and proof of work but this is not what the Small Web is about. Having a billion copies of the same database is not decentralisation. That’s centralisation. If you have a billion people, having a billion – two billion, three billion… – unique databases is decentralisation. In other words, decentralisation without topological decentralisation is bullshit."

I don't understand your point. What is the topological center of a blockchain?