“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:
Intersecting Currents of Change
Few Dare Discuss Social Security and the Decline in Full-Time Employment
Wendy McElroy: Measuring the Extent of a Police State
Cheating to Learn: How a UCLA professor gamed a game theory midterm
Seeking a Bolthole Community
Minimum Wage Madness
Catherine Austin Fitts: Moral Investing and the Coming Equity 'Crash-Up'
Cameron Herold: Let's raise kids to be entrepreneurs [2010]
David Galland: Big Brother's Beginnings
The cops are a dangerous replacement for private gun ownership
San Francisco still has a seedy heart
Fraud in the Financial Markets: Are You Vulnerable?
Nazi gold and currency wars - A full guide
Their Propaganda....Our Propaganda
Wow much Dogecoin. Very competition. So money.
