3 ms·
I think you're right, many things tend toward centralization, large networks and infrastructure (and sometimes difficult-to-solve problems) being among them. I
by orthecreedence 8y ago
I think you're right, many things tend toward centralization, large networks and infrastructure (and sometimes difficult-to-solve problems) being among them.
I personally "feel" (because I can't really form a hardened ideology around it) that the closer things get to infrastructure, the more neutral they should be. In other words, the more difficult it is to spin up a competitor to Company A, the more Company A should actively work to not censor or shape messages or ideas.
I also agree we cannot enforce decentralization. My hope is that one day, we can see the benefits of it as a people and collectively decide to go that route without coercion of any kind. Wishful thinking, probably =]. That won't stop me from trying to convince others of the benefits, though.
- madeofmeat 8y ago> we cannot enforce decentralization Sure we can, it's called antitrust law.
- raiflip 8y agoTo an extent, yes. That can prevent monopolies, but it does not prevent oligopolies, and in this case those are just as dangerous. If you want to protect free speech, you need not just one or two, but probably hundreds of viable platforms. It's not obvious this is something the legal system can properly enforce.