From perspective of UX, p2p’s evolution is backwards: centralized downloads are easier than BitTorrent Decentralization on its own also makes no sense too. Freenet brought decentralization and anonymity in 2000. Decentralized product/market fit serves two masters: users and law
-
-
Show this thread
-
A double pendulum’s trajectory looks chaotic. The motion of one part affects the other. The trajectory makes some sense if you watch how the forces interact I like this as imagery for product/market fit when decentralization is involved. Law and UX both influencing adoptionpic.twitter.com/xkLuBs4ATA
Show this thread -
Double pendulum product/market fit for p2p: • Centralized mp3 Servers: UX • Link-only websites: swing towards decentralization • Napster: swing towards UX • Likewise (Gnutella): decentralization • Kazaa/eDonkey: UX (better search) • BitTorrent: decentralization
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Yep I got nastygrams from music industry lawyers in 1995 for my web page hosting a collection of mp2 and .au Prince Bootlegs. Before this people shared them on newsgroups or the occasional open ftp server.
-
Newsgroups were sorta decentralized, but inevitably people lost chunks of files and it was a hassle.
-
Interesting! What sort traffic did you see to your mp2 blog? If I remember correctly,
@dweekly was getting something like 2k visitors/day to his mp3 site in 97 -
Anyway, lawyers were asking for content takedowns on the internet for as long as I've been on the internet.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.