A very interesting post was put up by a colleague of the Scriptorium and an equally interesting commentary by the respected Bletsev. The question of the architecture of the digital world in the future is key now, because digitization cannot be reversed, but the global networked world we have become accustomed to will clearly not exist in the form we have become accustomed to. By the way, it is interesting to reflect on this in light of the fact that the current processes of digital isolation are perceived - especially by the millennial generation - as nothing less than a personal tragedy and an unprecedented drama, but in fact nothing new is happening. First, the technology appears, then it is used and distributed without control for the time being, and after the process is sufficiently widespread, the state comes into action, which by its very nature exists to create regulatory mechanisms. And not just like that, but in response to objective challenges. This has always been the case with everything from book printing to cryptocurrency. And yes, indeed - if up to a certain point everything went exponentially towards an increase in content production, information exchange and involvement of the maximum number of global users in network configurations, now we see a sharp return: in a world where a hacker attack can cut off power to an entire country, they begin to worry about the presence of a "switch", in a world where they have become so skilled in information that they do not learn to produce skilled information to the extent that every day is skilled. distinguish between truth and falsehood. Therefore, the emergence of barriers is inevitable. The question is different. how to use it Countries, including ours (especially ours!) are now facing a difficult task - to learn to separate themselves from the global space if necessary, without losing the opportunity to be connected to it and without stopping development. So far we are only successful in the first point.