41–50 of 356 posts
I think it's fascinating to see distributed social networks from a tech perspective. From what I've seen so far they exacerbate the problems that Facebook has been seeing so much backlash against. 1. The whole Cambridge Analytica issue was caused by APIs that are too open. For distributed systems there are more ways to exploit the APIs and gather data on users. 2. There is a clear issue with Facebook's accountability…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does this have to do with centrally stored data. Having data in a central store doesn't imply third parties. If the store is decentralized, then any party could be equivalent to a third party, and therefore anyone has access to your data.
> Having data in a central store doesn't imply third parties. How is that going to work then? Every single company holding your data in a central place is mining it today and selling the information to advertisers. On a distributed network you replicate data only with people you choose. Since you're not going to add a government (or an ad company) to your friend list, they won't have your data. Private communications…
That doesn't mean it has to be that way in the future though. There are centralized social networks that are charging money for their use, and they are not selling to advertisers nor are there any.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The whole Cambridge Analytica issue was caused by APIs that are too open. For distributed systems there are more ways to exploit the APIs and gather data on users. Huh? Scuttlebutt is fully encrypted.. doesn't that make the API vastly more locked down than Facebook/etc? > There is a clear issue with Facebook's accountability in these areas. Distributed systems are typically open source, they run on multiple servers…
It's worse than facebook because there's no one to have responsibility to be accountable. This ties in with your question about GDPR. While I'm not a lawyer, as far as I know it doesn't matter if you're a person or a company, if you're collecting data, it's something you can be liable for. So in a distributed system, all parties who maintain the data sources would be liable. I actually wonder how this works logistica…
Yeah, it is worse because if you screw up, you don't have anyone to blame but yourself.
You have complete control over your data.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The whole Cambridge Analytica issue was caused by APIs that are too open. For distributed systems there are more ways to exploit the APIs and gather data on users. Huh? Scuttlebutt is fully encrypted.. doesn't that make the API vastly more locked down than Facebook/etc? > There is a clear issue with Facebook's accountability in these areas. Distributed systems are typically open source, they run on multiple servers…
> This is no worse than Facebook though. With Facebook, your friend could steal all of the data you let them see. With Scuttlebutt, your friend could steal all of the data you let them see. Your friend can, but Facebook can scrutinize third-party apps. In a decentralized world, there's no one who has access to holistically examine automated access and detect shady activity. In a decentralized world, everything is ess…
I can assure you that they don't. Anyone can have a third-party app that scavenges for private info.
See: Cambridge Analytica.
>there's no one who has access to holistically examine automated access and detect shady activity
There is. It is you. You can shut off access your data any time you want to. Yes, if you give someone access to some data, that data could potentially be out there forever but you can revoke access to your (future) data freely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's worse than facebook because there's no one to have responsibility to be accountable. This ties in with your question about GDPR. While I'm not a lawyer, as far as I know it doesn't matter if you're a person or a company, if you're collecting data, it's something you can be liable for. So in a distributed system, all parties who maintain the data sources would be liable. I actually wonder how this works logistica…
> It's worse than facebook because there's no one to have responsibility to be accountable. I guess I just don't understand what accountability there is to be even had? If I send an encrypted message to my friend, who is accountable? What are they accountable for? If I'm sending illegal content to someone only I can be held accountable (and possibly the person I'm sending to) . Is that any different in Scuttlebutts c…
As far as GDPR goes, you're right because you're specifically choosing people to send it to. However, having a mechanism to delete your messages on other people's systems when they sync would probably go a long way.
Anyone else not even use social networks anymore? Privacy or not, it's just garbage. Facebook, myspace, hello, whatever it's all the same crap with different CSS values. Do we even need social networks anymore?
It isn't an alternative to Facebook unless my grandma can use it, and she couldn't set this up for herself. The idea that centralized storage is the problem masks the actual concern. There is nothing inherently wrong with centrally stored data. There is a problem is when it is locked down by a 3rd party, and/or you don't control how it is used.
Facebook isn't an alternative to email if my grandma can't use it.
Computers aren't an alternative to telephones if my grandma can't use it.
Telephones aren't an alternative to mail if my grandma can't use it.
etc.
---
It'll get easier and simpler, I promise.
Anyone else not even use social networks anymore? Privacy or not, it's just garbage. Facebook, myspace, hello, whatever it's all the same crap with different CSS values. Do we even need social networks anymore?
You might have point...But can we keep HN?
We don't need those lame squares and their dank memes.
All these decentralized alternatives don't have iPhone apps. It's app store policy that is blocking devs, ain't it?