Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
jonny (good kind)'s posts Post Back to profile
Top-level
d@nny "disc@" mc²

@PersistentDreamer @jonny @fasterandworse there is an argument that decentralization is a bit of a handicap that i somewhat vibe with but this demonstrates how easily that argument can be misused to serve monopolistic profit motives diametrically opposed to user empowerment or indeed experience

24 October at 20:54 | Wall-to-wall | Open on circumstances.run
4 comments
d@nny "disc@" mc²

@PersistentDreamer @jonny @fasterandworse of course it's all extremely funny that they are backed by cryptocurrency here which basically invented being centralized and calling yourself decentralized for affinity fraud through the disaffected who have been harmed/disenfranchised by the financial system (here analogously harmed by social media—sex workers a great example of both). speaking out of both sides of their mouth

24 October at 21:01 | Open on circumstances.run
d@nny "disc@" mc²

@PersistentDreamer @jonny @fasterandworse unfortunately mastodon decentralization was not enough to save switter by @zemmi so there are actually modes of censorship resistance we can do better at to serve people along with safety features but (even though this is not a uniaxial spectrum) bluesky is of course not going that route

24 October at 21:04 | Open on circumstances.run
imdat celeste :v_tg: :v_nb: :v_genderfluid: [witchzard]

@hipsterelectron @PersistentDreamer @jonny @fasterandworse "... decentralization is a bit of a handicap ..." - this is true, I agree, there is always a decentralization penalty that you have to pay.

But this is like saying that "... democracy has the handicap of being inefficient ..." - which is equally true, but you know, in both cases the inefficiency is a core tenet of it in order to protect it from being usurped by a single bad actor.

Democracy's inefficiency as well as decentralization's is what protects them from being taken over.

Yes, they are and will always be less efficient than a centralized/autocratic system but this also protects them from a single-point-of-failure mistakes.

In a working democracy, if you kill the head of state, it won't destroy the system - same as in a decentralized system: if you kill one fedi instance, it won't affect all of them, unless, of course, that single fedi instance represents more than 10% of fedi citizenry.

Anyhow, just some thoughts...

@hipsterelectron @PersistentDreamer @jonny @fasterandworse "... decentralization is a bit of a handicap ..." - this is true, I agree, there is always a decentralization penalty that you have to pay.

But this is like saying that "... democracy has the handicap of being inefficient ..." - which is equally true, but you know, in both cases the inefficiency is a core tenet of it in order to protect it from being usurped by a single bad actor.

24 October at 21:02 | Open on tau-ceti.space
Dr. Quadragon ❌

@ics

> Democracy's inefficiency as well as decentralization's is what protects them from being taken over.

I wouldn't go so far as to call inefficiency a core tennet that protects the system from being taken over.

More like, it's an inevitable side-effect. A necessary evil, maybe. Too many variables to consider.

It's easy to be efficient if you aren't accountable to anyone.

@hipsterelectron @PersistentDreamer @jonny @fasterandworse

18 December at 21:34 | Open on mastodon.ml
Go Up