- Myths of Technology
- Posts
- It’s not Centralization vs Decentralization, it’s You vs Polarization
It’s not Centralization vs Decentralization, it’s You vs Polarization
Building Tolerance Amidst Polarizing Views on AI Centralization and Decentralization
Komalika Neyol
November 26, 2023
To humanity, there is nothing more seductive than certainty.
Whether it's the utilitarian nature of centralized arms manufacturing, the promise of democratic ownership in decentralization, the myriad of insurance services that offer support in bad times, or the promise of companionship and loyalty in a marriage, each conveys a form of certainty.
But what if something threatens that certainty? (Perhaps an introspective question for another day!)
The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters (c 1799) by Francisco Goya. It was the first in the series of many compositions intended mainly to criticize the ignorance of the common people, the vices of monks, and the stupidity of the great. What an apt representation of how the absence of reason can lead to chaos!
With the recent rise of open-source AI and hiccups in OpenAI’s strategy, the debate on centralization vs decentralization has intensified. Allegedly about power control, safety, and the benefits of ownership, this discourse often devolves into a polarizing tug-of-war with ad hominem attacks.
In simple terms, Polarization simplifies nuances into binary choices. Arguments quickly spiral into personal attacks, losing sight of logic and the end goal. Such is the powerful nature of polarization: you just need to show the enemy to them.
This oversimplification is evident in the absolutist arguments we witness: centralization is labeled as predatory, and decentralization is disorganized.
If there’s one thing that sells more than sex, it’s polarization.
The Death of Socrates (1787) by Jacques-Louis David who was commissioned by Charles-Michel Trudaine de la Sablière. Charles was executed in 1794 during the Reign of Terror. What’s more certain to life than death?
The truth, however, is that neither centralization nor decentralization is a one-size-fits-all solution. History shows us that systems often embody elements of both.
Monarchies are not absolutely centralized, democracies are not absolutely decentralized.
Linux is not completely open-sourced and Windows is not completely closed-sourced.
Genetic Modification is not entirely sufficient for high agricultural yields; Crop Rotation is not entirely efficient for nutrition replenishment in soil.
To have a nuanced understanding, it’s crucial to acknowledge the gray areas. The debate isn't about picking a side but about understanding the appropriate degrees of centralization and decentralization.
We need as much tolerance for technological utopia as much as we do for technological dystopia.
The world is not black and white, and neither can technology be.
Humans are nuanced, and so are their ideologies on AI.
Recognizing this diversity in thought and approach is not just an intellectual exercise – it's a necessity for progress and innovation.
Reply