> decentralized - disparate nodes communicating directly using agreed upon conventions. There is no centrally managed network. Think in terms of snail mail, IPv

> decentralized - disparate nodes communicating directly using agreed upon conventions. There is no centrally managed network. Think in terms of snail mail, IPv6, or phone numbers. This could be as simple as people using an agreed upon application to abstract away the transmission concerns but that application does not route traffic through a third party server. This definition really doesn’t sit right with me. IPv6 and phone numbers have central authorities. I can’t just configure my cellphone to receive calls from a number that I wasn’t issued by my carrier. Nor can my carrier issue me a number from another country’s number pool. To me, the phone network is a great example of a federated network. IPv6 is similar. I think snail mail is probably the best example of something that is truly decentralized. Sure, there are authorities that chop up plots of land and give them names and numbers, but no one prevents me from asking a friend to put a letter in the mailbox of 123 Main St. Please correct me if I’m missing some key semantic argument(s).