4 ms·
Twitter, like FaceBook, should be an open, distributed platform. They are too valuable to remain under the control of a person or small group of people. They
by datavirtue 9y ago
Twitter, like FaceBook, should be an open, distributed platform. They are too valuable to remain under the control of a person or small group of people. They are communities and their value slides, and danger to society increases, when they are under centralized control.
- throwaway0255 9y agoHow do you propose we identify companies that fit that criteria, and take ownership and control of them away from the people who created them? And remember, your proposal can't be a greater danger to society than the problem you're trying to fix, or that would defeat the purpose.
- mi100hael 9y agoYay, Socialism!
- willitpamp573 9y agoWho is gonna pay to host the open distributed platform? Surely not the users
- bigphishy 9y agoI don't have any figures, let's just 5 servers running containerized environments, with a couple of decent uplinks, it is feasible to handle bandwidth of a million users for a few thousand a month. With a million users, it's feasible to support the site with donations... no funding or IPO's needed... In addition, there are numberous open-source frameworks ( like gnu-social etc. ) that enable a single person to deploy the code onto the servers.
- umeshunni 9y ago"Please Read: A Personal Appeal From <open distributed platform> Founder" a la Wikipedia
- egypturnash 9y agoSo far Mastodon seems to be doing okay on a mix of "I wanna run a server for me and a few friends" and "I'm running a server, here's the Patreon to help pay for it".
- ferdbold 9y agoThat's precisely what Mastodon is going for, but I feel like the added complexity (i.e. choosing your instance) is a showstopper for the masses