Live data from Hacker News

My personal wishlist for a decentralized social network

carter.sande.duodecima.technology

51–60 of 271 posts

Re: My personal wishlist for a decentralized social network

#51
post #5

What I would prefer is a set of protocols that are interact in a well defined way with each others, like the Email or Usenet protocols, then you can write different clients for these and decentralisation is just a matter of running different servers clients that don't necessarily interact with each other. Something like the CapeProto RPC framework makes it relatively easy to declare the interface of a service.

RSS and Webmentions[1] do this pretty well on otherwise ordinary websites. The protocols exist, we just need to make them easier to use for non-engineers.

[1]: https://indieweb.org/Webmention

Re: My personal wishlist for a decentralized social network

#52
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO this is why federation is an important aspect of decentralized networks, and is commonly listed as a reason for use Mastodon / the fediverse. Each instance can set their own moderation policies and decide what other instances they want to federate with. Notably mastodon.social and the instances related to it haven't become cess pools of hate speech, because they do have strong moderation policies, but for users w…

> Each instance can set their own moderation policies and decide what other instances they want to federate with. Yeah, this is why the fediverse is terrible, too. Your site admin shouldn't be the one deciding who you can DM, or which people can follow your feed. Imagine if email worked that way.

The good part is that you can be your own site admin, or you can choose one who reflects your ideals.

Moderation is great, the trouble is when a single moderation standard is used across a monopolized market.

Re: My personal wishlist for a decentralized social network

#53

It should really be an open social network that government entities cannot shut down. The real test for anyone trying this will be the Great Wall of China. Until then...

That technology doesn't exist and never will. https://xkcd.com/538/

China's firewall is relatively open compared to North Korea, for instance.

Re: My personal wishlist for a decentralized social network

#54
I am a question about decentralized social networks in several communities and have not received much feedback. I think because I'm not a techie and considered completely different aspects.

For example the aspect of ownership. Whether the account should belong to the person who registered it. Some people, for example, invest in design, promotion and content creation.

It seems to me that the technical solutions proposed by you remove the issue of ownership. What do you think?

Re: My personal wishlist for a decentralized social network

#55
Thinking a new social network platform is destined to fail because it's a copy of something, but without the impetus that produced the original.It's the "make something people want," but more "make something they use for X."

You need the original purpose. It has to be to make something that isn't itself. Myspace was mainly novelty and music, Facebook was for status minting from ivy colleges, other ones are for an exogenous purpose as well. Politics isn't a useful unifying principle. I helped run a progressive political precursor to one of the major ones about 20+ years ago, and it only existed because it was tolerated by part of the establishment, and it could not survive a truly hostile environment.

Gamers made discord a thing because it was for playing games. Hipchat was about making code, and Slack was a way to manage people. Reddit was for sharing alternative/emerging culture.

A divergent platform needs a basis in the culture, and the current generation of censors came up in divergent/alternative culture, so they have a more sophisticated idea of what nascent opposition looks like than the old ones.

Short version is, we don't need a decentralized social network, we need new culture that produces networks, and courage to create that culture.

Re: My personal wishlist for a decentralized social network

#56
P2P services like the article suggests are impractical in real life. It's of extreme importance that you should be able to view, and preferably interact with, something posted on a social media service with as little friction as possible — which means it has to have a web version, and that all content within must have permanent HTTP URLs. No one will be downloading a client and syncing it to the P2P network to view a post or to comment on one or to like one. This has never worked and never will, because it's inevitably a messy experience.

ActivityPub is basically as far as one could push the decentralization of social media without severe UX compromises.

Re: My personal wishlist for a decentralized social network

#57
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO this is why federation is an important aspect of decentralized networks, and is commonly listed as a reason for use Mastodon / the fediverse. Each instance can set their own moderation policies and decide what other instances they want to federate with. Notably mastodon.social and the instances related to it haven't become cess pools of hate speech, because they do have strong moderation policies, but for users w…

> Each instance can set their own moderation policies and decide what other instances they want to federate with. Yeah, this is why the fediverse is terrible, too. Your site admin shouldn't be the one deciding who you can DM, or which people can follow your feed. Imagine if email worked that way.

This seems strictly better than what we have, though, where Twitter or Facebook decide the same. At least you can move instances, or start your own.

EDIT: also to note, email does kind of work this way with administrator applied spam lists. I would not want to use an email service that couldn't or wouldn't filter spam.

Re: My personal wishlist for a decentralized social network

#58
post #15

I had written a toy social network a few years back the past which had these features - It worked very much like an encrypted version of usenet. This is probably my bias as an engineer showing, but the technology doesn't seem like the hard part- I always understood that having an resilient network means people will use it to post some bad things, but I don't know if I really internalized the scope of that until later…

There's another dimension that nobody seems to talk about, and that's what happens with access to content is restricted. There is basically no censorship and no abuse from "those who can't get away with stuff on other networks" in the realm of SMS (or WhatsApp/WeChat/whatever your country uses). You can have a very healthy network if the authors are responsible for access control to their content. That's the idea behind my side-project of an easy-to-use, easy-to-selfhost private blog.[1]

When people want to use the platform to "become a thought leader" or "expand their network" then you're in the realm of public publishing which is where all the problems you cite become issues. The web makes privacy possible, and I don't understand why so few people are interested in that angle. For me I want to be able to share photos of my daughter with family and friends. I don't care if someone else wants to privately rant about the government to their friends--privacy enables both of these.

[1] https://github.com/mawise/simpleblog

Re: My personal wishlist for a decentralized social network

#59
post #48

Regardless of technical viability, any service without moderation is a service mainstream society will shun, which really just means people won't use it, build tools for it, or generally accept others who use the service. People seem to both want a service that is immune from society and also used by society. That's a conflict that won't resolve.

Yes, it will resolve, and in fact has been solved. K-means clustering. This will scale, is compatible with machine learning, and yields an effect that is good for the users of a service -- but is not useful to owners of a service that maximizes profit and control over user happiness. If trolls, jackasses, and idiots (by each users independent definition) get automatically segregated into groups where they see only ea…

Grouping by user rather than by content has a major weakness. Grandma can be lovely 99% of the time and a horrible racist the other 1%.

Re: My personal wishlist for a decentralized social network

#60
post #15

I had written a toy social network a few years back the past which had these features - It worked very much like an encrypted version of usenet. This is probably my bias as an engineer showing, but the technology doesn't seem like the hard part- I always understood that having an resilient network means people will use it to post some bad things, but I don't know if I really internalized the scope of that until later…

IMO this is why federation is an important aspect of decentralized networks, and is commonly listed as a reason for use Mastodon / the fediverse. Each instance can set their own moderation policies and decide what other instances they want to federate with. Notably mastodon.social and the instances related to it haven't become cess pools of hate speech, because they do have strong moderation policies, but for users w…

Any idea why Parler took off rather than a right-wing instance of Mastodon? Is it about framing?
Post reply on HN