Talk:Are Coops Outdated in a Network Age: Difference between revisions

From P2P Foundation
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
Line 2: Line 2:




Tiberius: coops are networks, but not large scale ones. Can you imagine the entire wikipedia community as a coop? Would someone who contributes one word to a Wikipedia page a members be considered a member? What about the international character of all contributors to Wikipedia?
Tiberius: coops are networks, but not large scale ones. Can you imagine the entire wikipedia community as a coop? Would someone who contributes one word to a Wikipedia page be considered a member? What about the international character of all contributors to Wikipedia?

Latest revision as of 04:59, 11 March 2013

I have a hard time reading an article that starts with a ridiculous statement: "But coops aren't well- equipped to extract value from the long tail, which is the core of the new p2p paradigm. They are boxes with well-defined boundaries, NOT networks." There is nothing in defining a network that has anything to do with a requirement for ability to extract value from the long tail. To say coops are are not networks is ridiculous. You might re-think how to communicate what you are trying to say without a statement like that.


Tiberius: coops are networks, but not large scale ones. Can you imagine the entire wikipedia community as a coop? Would someone who contributes one word to a Wikipedia page be considered a member? What about the international character of all contributors to Wikipedia?