You brought up good points for discussion. >1. The relative difficulty of running your own as an absolute beginner The ease-of-use is brought up several times

You brought up good points for discussion. >1. The relative difficulty of running your own as an absolute beginner The ease-of-use is brought up several times as a barrier to decentralization but I don't think this is really the fundamental issue. Yes, it appears to be the problem but it really isn't. If hackers invent a super simple UI, or hypothetical set-and-forget "IPFS/Sandstorm appliance", or an auto-configuring node... it still won't help widespread adoption for decentralization. I was an expert for installing SMTP email servers but I don't bother with running a "decentralized" home email server anymore. Many sysadmin experts have abandoned the idea of running home email servers. If decentralization is the ideal, why do hackers like us not follow it? We're certainly not waiting for beginner-friendly email server software. (My previous comment about this.[1]) Also, any attempt to bake the "ease-of-use" into an idiot-proof software package or hardware appliance becomes its own vector for an attack on the unwitting homeowner. (Previous comment.[2]) >2. The eventual centralization on top of the most well-run versions (like Matrix) Yes, this is the most unsolved problem by far: costs. One can write or decree that a protocol specification to be distributed but it doesn't change the fact that the real-world implementation of that protocol always costs real money and the money spent is not distributed. That leads to centralization. (Previous comments.[3][4]) I've been studying the decentralization space for years and have read every whitepaper about Diaspora, IPFS, Filecoin, Sandstorm, Mastodon, bitcoin, etc and nobody has figured this out. (Suggestion to HN readers... every time you see a proposal for a new decentralized protocol, do a Ctrl+F for "costs" and "money". It's a very under discussed topic.) Real costs of hardware such as cpu+disk+bandwidth and costs of human labor such as trust+maintenance are inescapable and it is the #1 puzzle to decentralization. E.g. Mastodon was recently suggested in various HN threads about "alternative to Facebook". Hmmmm.... if cpu+disk are not free... who's paying for the mastodon servers?!? Well, I see that several volunteers run Patreon crowdfunding to keep the lights on.[5] That's very noble but that funding model is also not scalable. That recreates how many BBS (bulletin board systems) were run in the 1980s with dial up modems. Only a small group of enthusiasts were users on each server. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15526089 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15526089 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11861683 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11861683 [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14125730 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14125730 [4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15878668 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15878668 [5] https://www.google.com/search?q=mastadon+patreon https://www.google.com/search?q=mastadon+patreon