tiberius on tib ash overlap ness

tiberius brastavicean on tiberius and ashton overlap ness

via tiberius tweet [https://x.com/TiberiusB/status/2120924346713575647?s=20]:

[for context – 2 thread tweets prior: tb: SP assumes that fragmentation is the principal obstacle to social coordination, when the deeper problem may be the lack of appropriate mechanisms for coordination between autonomous, heterogeneous agents.. mb: I find it hard to see the difference ?]

mb: I find it hard to see the difference ?

Mainly, this debate is what sets apart Network Nations – @balajis from CoordiNations – @yaoeo

primavera on network sovereignties et al

@ProtocolSociety is on the side on Network Nations, promising to provide the underlying tech to achieve that.

@Holochain , including OVN, Sensorica etc are on the other side, providing the underlying tech to support CoordiNations.

Holochain assumes that segmentation / separation / division of information is natural, and even desirable, and provides tools for local contextual coordination that can also scale to global. Agents hold their data in private chains and coordinate through shares applications, some data is shared more videlt via DHT. So on this side we don’t fight segmentation of information, we work with it. We bet on stigmergy for scaling and reaching large scale coordination. Large scale coordination is reachable while considering segmentation as desirable.

People on the other side of the debate, SP and Network States do as if stigmergy doesn’t exist. They consider segmentation a problem and the only solution for coordination is a synchronized state.

As for my own positioning, I’m standing on the stigmergy side, not excluding synchronization when needed, embracing segmentation of information, which I see as a source of freedom, of change and renewal. This is what I think a p2p societal project should stand for.

need beyond hello stigmergy ness.. a letting go. of info ness et al

_____

_____

_____

_____

_____

_____

______

______