Hi @alberto, this is an interesting issue.
P2P traffic had peaked to be 69% of total internet traffic in Germany in 2007 ( https://www.cse.wustl.edu/~jain/cse571-07/ftp/p2p/#study & Press Releases | ipoque )… in 2019 however, it fell to the neighbourhood of 5% ( Netflix Dominates Internet Traffic Worldwide, BitTorrent Ranks Fifth * TorrentFreak ). Similarly to make another example, despite promising radical decentralisation and the substitution of trust by algorithm-driven verification of claims, blockchains have all started meddling with mechanisms of centralised control, roughly since the 2016 DAO attack and consequent Ethereum fork, and today one sees permissioned solutions ( Home | Suscribo ), editable (!!) chains ( When Blockchain Meets the Right to be Forgotten: Technology Versus Law and Editable Blockchain : First step towards exception management | by hunny khanna | Medium ), and various experiments in quorum systems ( https://tezos.gitlab.io/master/whitedoc/voting.html and https://consensys.net/ )… all to adapt to external requirements and to fit within existing financial and regulatory models (and they were already radically less pirate and anarchic than the previous at least 2 waves of decentralised tech on internet!!), rather than because of inherent technical reflections, or visions of future societies… a clash that homoeopathically dilutes the long-term vision on the reasons of short term success?
It all seems to me to relate to how policies get informed by unknowns and believes, often transversal to the topic that is being deliberated about (e.g. P2P and the mistaken belief that sharing subtracts value to the creative industry → https://cdn.netzpolitik.org/wp-upload/2017/09/displacement_study.pdf )
…this could be a good paper to read ahead of any effort to produce evidences for NGI → Beyond evidence versus truthiness: toward a symmetrical approach to knowledge and ignorance in policy studies | Policy Sciences
Are you calling Julia Reda on this?