“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:
Bitcoin In Context, A Brief Cultural History Of Money - Lui Smyth
Reflections on 9/11 and the High Cost of Waging War in the Middle East
America, Flirting with the Dark Side of History
Chris Martenson: Bankers Own the World - And are ultimately destroying it
Paul Rosenberg: The Internet Is Being Slaughtered in the Back Room
Breaking the last taboo - Gaza and the threat of world war
Exploding Sunni-Shia Conflict: Impact on Oil, Stocks, and More
Shanghai's History a Tale of Successful Capitalism
David Galland: Lessons from the Argentine
Paul Ehrlich predicted an imminent population catastrophe in 1965
I'm Astounded by This Terrorism Statute
Snowden leaks: the real take-home
No, thanks: Stop saying “support the troops”
Ron Paul: A Republic, Not a Democracy
A $100k earner gets to keep $99k in Singapore but $57k in San Francisco
