Show Navigation
Conversation
Notices
-
@Moon @yapple @parisc >most people are more comfortable using a branded product.
I think I've said this before about crypto/web3, but the same applies here: fedi is appealing to people who want technology to be the impartial arbiter of the world, because they don't trust human institutions to do it. We don't want "Twitter, but with my people in charge of the ban button", or even "Twitter, but with impartial benevolent people in charge of the ban button", we want a solution where no one and everyone has a ban button. Mostly that's because the kind of people who gravitate here feel powerless to get humans to do what they believe is the right thing.
But there are lots of people who are much more comfortable with institutions where humans are in charge. Technology makes them feel powerless, their position affords them the ability to call a lawyer and sue someone when they feel wronged. To these people, fedi's decentralization is not only unappealing, it's a detriment.
-
> We don't want "Twitter, but with my people in charge of the ban button", or even "Twitter, but with impartial benevolent people in charge of the ban button"
I think a lot of people want exactly that. But if they think about it, there are always some points where they disagree with most of "their people" and they'd rather have those decisions made differently.
It is a toss-up whether many people would be willing to leave an instance ... or self-host over this.
> we want a solution where no one and everyone has a ban button.
I think eventually, some #P2P elements (maybe like #Twister) will have to be added. Maybe servers / instances will turn into trusted relays for a P2P network. Or maybe P2P will be an add-on atop the existing federated networks.