# P2p

`kaal:entity:p2p`

**Status.** derived

This node is assembled mechanically from the 4 claims that carry the concept tag `p2p`. It is a roster of what the corpus says under this term. It is **not** an adjudicated definition: no single statement here has been ruled canonical, and no first-appearance call has been made. Read the claims and judge for yourself.

## Every claim under this term

4 claims across 1 works, 2021 to 2021.

**2021**

- [3782198-007](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/3782198-007) [design/argued] -- If a peer to peer network were decentrally owned by its users, its algorithms could be open source and still remain safe, because the network could reward members for policing exploitation instead of relying on a centralized company to keep the algorithm opaque.
  > if the P)P network were decentrally owned by the users them- selves, the algorithms can be open source and still remain safe.
  Craig Calcaterra, Wulf A. Kaal, Contemporary Decentralization (2021). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3782198
- [3782198-021](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/3782198-021) [mechanism/argued] *(failure mode)* -- Earlier centralized companies defeated more decentralized peer to peer platforms because of the technology of the time and the incentive design built into capitalist civilization: consumer devices could not match industrial upload speeds, centralized firms had the incentive to polish user interfaces, and economies of scale made central bureaucracy worth negotiating.
  > The reason earlier centralized companies succeeded against more decentralized P)P platforms is due to the existing technology of the time and the natural incentive design that is built into our capitalist civilization.
  Craig Calcaterra, Wulf A. Kaal, Contemporary Decentralization (2021). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3782198
- [3782198-022](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/3782198-022) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- Existing decentralized filesharing networks cannot guarantee the availability of unpopular files such as personal files, whereas centralized cloud services guarantee availability for a fee.
  > One problem with most existing decentralized filesharing networks is that unpop- ular files (such as your personal files) are not guaranteed to be available, unlike cen- tralized cloud computing services which guarantee availability for a fee.
  Craig Calcaterra, Wulf A. Kaal, Contemporary Decentralization (2021). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3782198
- [3782198-023](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/3782198-023) [mechanism/asserted] -- Peer to peer networks scale more favorably than client server architectures because client server costs increase linearly per unit while peer to peer network costs can decrease with each added node, depending on topology.
  > Network effects proliferate in peer-to-peer networks because, unlike the traditional client- server architecture which is subject to the linearly increasing per-unit costs, the peer- to-peer network costs can decrease with each added node (depending on topology).
  Craig Calcaterra, Wulf A. Kaal, Contemporary Decentralization (2021). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3782198

## Verify

Every claim above resolves to a record carrying a verbatim source quote, the sha256 of the source PDF, and a preformatted citation. Nothing here asks to be taken on trust.

    curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/entities/p2p.md | sha256sum

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of this entity node. Its sha256 is the content hash.