Using “egalitarian“ instead of “decentralised“ to refer to a network topology without centres
I don’t like the term “decentralised” (which sucks, given how often I use it). For one thing, it’s ambiguous (see, for example, the eternal debate of whether or not to use “decentralised“ or “distributed” when you mean “no centres”). For another, it defines itself in relation to its inverse. I’m going to start using “egalitarian“ to describe the network topology where every node is equal.
@aral I think there's not wrong with 'decentralized'. Egalitarian is more of a social-economic-political term. Also don't forget that a decentralized network doesn't have to mean that all nodes are equal. Some are smaller/larger, some have less/more features, some have different roles in the network.
