Gordon Brander comparing the up and downsides of three network topologies (centralized, distributed, and decentralized), and the spectrum of variations between them. Also shared for the “Ostrom commons,” and for the piece in the context of Brander’s research for Subconscious, a tool for imagination.
Federations are pluralistic by nature. Different groups can have different governance models, tailored to the goals of the community. This grants federation more variety than centralized one-size-fits-all networks. It also grants federation more variety than p2p networks, since a protocol can never have requisite variety to encompass the complexity of human nature. […]
[I]t may be more helpful to view network topologies as a design space, where different models, and mixed models can be designed to produce particular outcomes.