I wish people would quit assuming my interest in decentralization is based on privacy concerns. There are lots of things that are much higher priorities:

• Censorship resistance.
• Resilience. An entire library of content/social graph isn't destroyed because of a change in corporate focus.
• Evolution. Protocols can change more when not under a single administrative domain of control, and in ways that meet the interests of user communities rather than productization committees.
• Flexibility. Since things are decentralized anyway, it's much harder for the system to ossify in a way that relies on one particular family of devices.
• Namespacing. Being able to 'reserve your brand' across all social graphs is an antifeature.

And by censorship resistance I'm also interested in resistance to the Content Cartel's censorship regime and their perversion of the government into a rent-collecting institution that exists to preserve an archaic business model based on the assumptions of hard-to-reproduce artifacts.

@Azure The #privacyFundamentalism is strong with some around the fediverse. Willing to give up any freedom just for the promise of privacy...

"The OS is also guilty, because of the amount of freedom given to devs, and the lack of control in the store...."

"Apple are closed and hostile to repair but..."

I would also add content availability and consistency through replication. Privacy is a low hanging fruit to get ppl onboard

Sign in to participate in the conversation
The Vulpine Club

The Vulpine Club is a friendly and welcoming community of foxes and their associates, friends, and fans! =^^=