I'm waiting to see whether over the long-term, corporate strategy can win out over a product which has gained wide exposure. Does the Microsoft ad campaign more resemble the efforts of homeowners who built on the beach to hold back the inevitable erosion of the tide? Alternatively, does it represent a comet heading for earth that will put up a dark cloud that will wipe out most "life" on earth?
Here's another way to look at the problem: the physics of evolution. If we can treat p2p as an ecosystem, we can apply the same types of energy balances. The paper isn't talking aobut extinction of p2p, it's talking about a change in the observable patterns it exhibits. Because stressing a network can't eliminate p2p, a new one will pop up in its place. If you treat user demand as "free energy" the most stable state of those users is in sharing. Fundamentally, when you stress an ecosytem, it can "fail" in that the species in it aren't the same, but new ones pop up. The dinosaurs went extinct, but here we are!
Slashdot Mirror
I'm waiting to see whether over the long-term, corporate strategy can win out over a product which has gained wide exposure. Does the Microsoft ad campaign more resemble the efforts of homeowners who built on the beach to hold back the inevitable erosion of the tide? Alternatively, does it represent a comet heading for earth that will put up a dark cloud that will wipe out most "life" on earth?
Here's another way to look at the problem: the physics of evolution. If we can treat p2p as an ecosystem, we can apply the same types of energy balances. The paper isn't talking aobut extinction of p2p, it's talking about a change in the observable patterns it exhibits. Because stressing a network can't eliminate p2p, a new one will pop up in its place. If you treat user demand as "free energy" the most stable state of those users is in sharing. Fundamentally, when you stress an ecosytem, it can "fail" in that the species in it aren't the same, but new ones pop up. The dinosaurs went extinct, but here we are!