3 ms·

I'm always annoyed when people think the Decentralized Web needs to replace the Centralized Web, like some glorious revolution. The decentralized web doesn't ne

I'm always annoyed when people think the Decentralized Web needs to replace the Centralized Web, like some glorious revolution. The decentralized web doesn't need to be as big as the centralized web, nor does it have to have as many users. The distributed file and chat applications used in the '90s and 2000s (IRC, XMPP, Gnutella, etc) were mostly run by a niche set of users anyway. I just want to have an ecosystem where like-minded folks can share, communicate, and such. I also would love to see the ability for the decentralized web to "plug into" the centralized web (i.e. publish to Twitter/FB under my identities). My friends and I have been running our own network for a bit and playing with a very grassroots version of the web. Those of us that work in software host and create services to distribute music, movies, etc. that we collect. We also process our own IoT sensors and devices. It's maintained by those of us in software, but we have friends not in software accessing the network and using its resources. It's a lot of fun!

j3097736 10y ago
Limewire was mostly run by a niche set of users?
- dajohnson89 10y ago
  Relative to how ubiquitous Facebook et al is, yes.
  - niftich 10y ago
    Limewire, Bittorrent, and its ilk were fairly mainstream in the same way that driving over the speed limit, recreational drug use, and jaywalking are; and like these things it was often afoul of the law. So as enforcement got better and legal alternatives emerged, their 'popularity' declined. There are also people who share Netflix logins, which is a (grey-market) option for those with no money, but is vastly less likely to result in DMCA notices mailed out to you. If anything, the various decentralized networks of the 1990-2000s were the products of organic demand. There is simply less demand now than there was, or that demand is being suppressed by other mechanisms (such as laws, in the case of copyright-infringing sharing). Perhaps there's just not a lot of demand for hosting your own identity in some decentralized, federated social network.
ZenoArrow 10y ago
> "I also would love to see the ability for the decentralized web to "plug into" the centralized web (i.e. publish to Twitter/FB under my identities)." Diaspora has this functionality: https://wiki.diasporafoundation.org/Integrating_other_social_networks https://wiki.diasporafoundation.org/Integrating_other_social...

j3097736 10y ago

Limewire was mostly run by a niche set of users?

dajohnson89 10y ago
Relative to how ubiquitous Facebook et al is, yes.
- niftich 10y ago
  Limewire, Bittorrent, and its ilk were fairly mainstream in the same way that driving over the speed limit, recreational drug use, and jaywalking are; and like these things it was often afoul of the law. So as enforcement got better and legal alternatives emerged, their 'popularity' declined. There are also people who share Netflix logins, which is a (grey-market) option for those with no money, but is vastly less likely to result in DMCA notices mailed out to you. If anything, the various decentralized networks of the 1990-2000s were the products of organic demand. There is simply less demand now than there was, or that demand is being suppressed by other mechanisms (such as laws, in the case of copyright-infringing sharing). Perhaps there's just not a lot of demand for hosting your own identity in some decentralized, federated social network.

ZenoArrow 10y ago

> "I also would love to see the ability for the decentralized web to "plug into" the centralized web (i.e. publish to Twitter/FB under my identities)." Diaspora has this functionality: https://wiki.diasporafoundation.org/Integrating_other_social_networks https://wiki.diasporafoundation.org/Integrating_other_social...