Decentralized Execution vs. Interaction Brokers: Decentralized Execution and the Architectural Redundancy of Centralized Interaction Brokers

Centralized interaction brokers have historically occupied a critical role in digital systems by mediating identity, discovery, trust, transaction routing, and settlement between users and services. Their dominance emerged not from inherent superiority but from architectural constraints imposed by device-centric computing, fragmented identity systems, and centralized execution infrastructures. As Adaptive Computing (AC) systems mature, these constraints are progressively removed. In AC environments, computation is distributed, identity is continuously authenticated, intent is inferred contextually, and execution occurs at or near the point of interaction. This paper argues that under these conditions, centralized interaction brokers become technically redundant rather than merely economically inefficient. We analyze the architectural origins of interaction brokers, contrast centralized mediation with decentralized execution models, and demonstrate how the convergence of identity, intent, and execution dissolves traditional interaction chokepoints. The paper concludes that decentralized execution is not a philosophical design choice but a structural consequence of modern adaptive architectures.