Hettinga does *nothing* but hand-waving, folks...

[Carskadden, Rush]

   Agreed. My understanding of Hettinga's (and this list's, for the most
part) use of the term "geodesic" is to indicate the accomplishment of a
shortest path between two elemnts via increased individual capabilities and
reduced reliance on low-efficiency centralized control, as opposed to the
concept of eliminating or reducing centralized control in general just for
the sake of itself. I am only part of the way through the geodesic economy
texts, myself, but I like to think of the particular form of geodesic
architecture implied therein as incorporating some distributed
infrastructure as a means to an efficiency gain end. But then, I know fuck
all. Am I mistaken?


-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Choate [mailto:ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com]
Sent: Saturday, December 09, 2000 10:49 AM
To: cypherpunks at EINSTEIN.ssz.com
Subject: Re: Hettinga does *nothing* but hand-waving, folks...


On Sat, 9 Dec 2000, R. A. Hettinga wrote:

> dropped packets, or time or something, and the network certainly *looks*
> like a geodesic one, with multiple nodes plugged into lots of lines
> routing packets in arbitrary directions instead of up and down a
> hierarchy.

That's not geodesic, that's a distributed systems with stochastic
management algorithms. The epitomy of 'free market' thinking applied to
communications engineering. It's certainly non-hierarchical but it isn't
'minimum distance'.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 2168 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks-legacy/attachments/20001211/1e656b7b/attachment.txt>