Using “egalitarian“ instead of “decentralised“ to refer to a network topology without centres
I don’t like the term “decentralised” (which sucks, given how often I use it). For one thing, it’s ambiguous (see, for example, the eternal debate of whether or not to use “decentralised“ or “distributed” when you mean “no centres”). For another, it defines itself in relation to its inverse. I’m going to start using “egalitarian“ to describe the network topology where every node is equal.
@aral "every node is equal" may come up against practical constraints. Is it really necessary for all users to have enough bandwidth and connectivity to be equal to a node at a colocated data centre? And if so, what does this do to the economics of providing internet access at remote locations (say, rural Norway, or the Australian outback)? Can a just network admit users at constrained locations without requiring them to have top-notch connectivity?
