4 ms·
These are all false equivalencies, as you're talking technology and implementation instead of a consumer product or idea. The author is talking about centraliza
by TobyTheDog123 4y ago
These are all false equivalencies, as you're talking technology and implementation instead of a consumer product or idea. The author is talking about centralization of moderation and audience, not how it's hosted or how that moderation/audience is presented to the user
People moved off of IRC because it was inconvenient for less-technical users, it is far easier to just download an app. That doesn't mean they want those apps to be centralized, or don't want their social media to be fragmented so they're talking to only like-minded individuals.
It is 100% possible that someone creates a technologically-centralized app that allows for a decentralized audience and moderation. I'm not aware of anyone doing this though.
- borski 4y agoI agree, but I’d also argue discord or Slack does this, in the same way that IRC did; you essentially spin up separate servers and thus separate communities. Sure, it’s still hosted by a central entity, but the moderation and discourse is all yours to manage.
- TobyTheDog123 4y agoI have no idea how I blanked on Discord. To me Slack still screams "business tool" and "only business tool," but you're very much right regardless. There's also Reddit (to an extent)
- josephcsible 4y ago> the moderation and discourse is all yours to manage. No it isn't. Look at all the things https://discord.com/guidelines https://discord.com/guidelines and https://slack.com/acceptable-use-policy https://slack.com/acceptable-use-policy say you can't do. For example, Discord bans sharing cheats for even single-player games, and Slack bans discussing ideas for a chat app of your own.
- borski 4y agoOK fine, I stand corrected. But my larger point was that the movement toward these types of communities / services is indicative of the article’s thesis being correct, in general.