“Networks, when attacked, become even more decentralized and resilient. A good example is Napster and its successors, each of which has more closely approached an ideal peer-to-peer model, and further freed itself from reliance on infrastructure that can be shut down by central authority, than its predecessors. Hierarchies, on the other hand, respond to attack by becoming even more ossified, brittle and closed. Hierarchies respond to leaks by becoming internally opaque and closed even to themselves, so that their information is compartmentalized and they are less able to make effective use of the knowledge dispersed among their members.”
Related posts:
The Market Shall Set North Korea Free
The Road to Debt-Serfdom
Is The Safety Of The State Really Worth More Than The Truth?
Tyler Winklevoss: Digital Darwinism
Doug Casey Refutes Common Hesitations to Internationalize
Hurricane Sandy and Gas Lines
What Bitcoin investors are funding?
The Power Elite-Obama Connection
Bill Bonner: Too Much Of A Good Thing
Ahead of the Herd—Nicaragua’s Enormous Potential
When Homeland Security Theater goes Off-Script
The Case of the Missing $700 Billion
Bill Bonner: A Crash Course in Money (Part III)
The Ecuadorian Library: or, The Blast Shack After Three Years
If the Law Is This Complicated, Why Shouldn’t Ignorance Be an Excuse?
