moxie seems to believe there are only two options for how services can be hosted: self-hosting or commercial hosting.

completely ignoring community hosting.

that reinforces my feel that community hosting is one of the biggest advantages of fedi.

(he is absolutely right that #web3 is crap, of course)


I honestly wonder why much attention is paid to moxie's rants, the millionaire who stood in front of and basically said that
consensus is hard, therefore we should just do everything his way.

I suppose it's partly the same reason gates, bezos, zuckerberg et al get attention; because they got obscenely economically rich through being tech entrepreneurs and somehow "we" still admire "got rich".

@keith @rysiek that's not entirely fair, he did contribute useful crypto and security work for years before turning into the soft-spoken counterrevolutionary asshat he is today

@eaon @rysiek
I did like the DEFCON 18 talk - the part around 17 minutes on Poindexter to The "Kitten surveillance society" and all that. It was a good point very well presented.

I presume this thread is a response to Moxie's take on centralized vs. federated communication along these lines?

@rysiek @sheogorath @eaon @keith

@rysiek I'm no great fan of Moxie's persistent doomsaying about decentralization. But this piece does makes some valid points that deserve a substantial response. Intriguingly, his observations about the inherent limitations of pure P2P designs - in an age of mobiles and browsers as the main user agent - kind of supports arguments that federated technologies are more likely to achieve some degree of redecentralization of the net. Modulo community-hosting working out.

@sheogorath @eaon @keith


"Eventually, all the web3 parts are gone, and you have a website for buying and selling JPEGS with your debit card. The project can’t start as a web2 platform because of the market dynamics, but the same market dynamics and the fundamental forces of centralization will likely drive it to end up there."

@rysiek @sheogorath @eaon @keith

... and:

"We should accept the premise that people will not run their own servers by designing systems that can distribute trust without having to distribute infrastructure. This means architecture that anticipates and accepts the inevitable outcome of relatively centralized client/server relationships, but uses cryptography (rather than infrastructure) to distribute trust."

@rysiek @sheogorath @eaon @keith

> designing systems that can distribute trust without having to distribute infrastructure

If you can distribute trust across a cluster of servers run by a single organization, surely there are effective ways to distribute trust across a cluster of servers run by different organizations?

@rysiek @sheogorath @eaon @keith

This thread refers to the talk in question. Despite the fact that the cat is long out of the bag as such, in respect of the original request to not have it archived I will not post a direct link here.

Regístrate para participar en la conversación
Telecomunicaciones Indígenas Comunitarias

Servidor experimental para I+D en Intranets.