view release on metacpan or  search on metacpan

share/SpamAssassin/easy_ham/00914.a24840d53c5f49a00e66fa4425e4626d  view on Meta::CPAN

Received: from xent.com ([64.161.22.236]) by dogma.slashnull.org
    (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g989KUK08679 for <jm@jmason.org>;
    Tue, 8 Oct 2002 10:20:31 +0100
Received: from lair.xent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xent.com (Postfix)
    with ESMTP id 431202940AE; Tue,  8 Oct 2002 02:20:04 -0700 (PDT)
Delivered-To: fork@spamassassin.taint.org
Received: from gremlin.ics.uci.edu (gremlin.ics.uci.edu [128.195.1.70]) by
    xent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D50442940AE; Tue,  8 Oct 2002 02:19:38
    -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (godzilla.ics.uci.edu [128.195.1.58]) by
    gremlin.ics.uci.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g989JCgB000573;
    Tue, 8 Oct 2002 02:19:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: why is decentralization worth worrying about?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v482)
From: Rohit Khare <khare@alumni.caltech.edu>
To: fork@spamassassin.taint.org
Message-Id: <2583F1FA-DA52-11D6-B1B1-000393A46DEA@alumni.caltech.edu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.482)
X-Mailscanner: Found to be clean
Sender: fork-admin@xent.com
Errors-To: fork-admin@xent.com
X-Beenthere: fork@spamassassin.taint.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:fork@spamassassin.taint.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork>, <mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: Friends of Rohit Khare <fork.xent.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork>,
    <mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://xent.com/pipermail/fork/>
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 17:09:00 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by dogma.slashnull.org
    id g989KUK08679

Why am I so passionate about decentralization? Because I believe some of 
today’s most profound problems with networked applications are caused by 
centralization.

Generically, a centralized political or economic system permits only one 
answer to a question, while decentralization permits many separate 
agents to hold different opinions of the same matter. In the specific 
context of software, centralized variables can only contain one valid 
value at a time. That limits us to only representing information A) 
according to the beliefs of a single agency, and B) that changes more 
slowly than it takes to propagate. Nevertheless, centralization is the 
basis for today’s most popular architectural style for developing 
network applications: client-server interaction using request-response 
communication protocols.

I believe these are profound limitations, which we are already 
encountering in practice. Spam, for example, is in the eye of the 
beholder, yet our email protocols and tools do not acknowledge the 
separate interests of senders and receivers. Slamming, for another, 
unfairly advantages the bidder with the lowest-latency connection to a 
centralized auction server. Sharing ad-hoc wireless networks is yet a 
third example of decentralized resource allocation. Furthermore, as 
abstract as centralization-induced failures might seem today, these 
limits will _not_ improve as the cost of computing, storage, and 
communication bandwidth continue to plummet. Instead, the speed of light 
and human independence constitute _fundamental_ limits to centralized 
information representation, and hence centralized software architecture.