3 ms·

As evidenced by how Fediverse works (Mastodon for example); The networks actively ban bad acting networks, have very active set of moderators on each network, e

As evidenced by how Fediverse works (Mastodon for example); The networks actively ban bad acting networks, have very active set of moderators on each network, etc. How is this any different from centralized thing?

the_gastropod 3y ago
The Nostr website basically makes fun of this aspect of Mastodon. https://nostr.com/comparisons/mastodon https://nostr.com/comparisons/mastodon
- askonomm 3y ago
  Oh, well, I should've read the fine print. My bad.
_heimdall 3y ago
This is the kicker people reaching for federation miss. Federation just means you may have more moderators running around moderating more copies of all the same data. Federation has a few pros for sure, but avoiding moderation isn't one of them. If anything its harder to know who is doing the moderating and where to look if you think things may be quietly being banned or buried.
belorn 3y ago
The major difference is that people can choose a different network if they are unhappy with the moderation from any specific network. A channel on youtube can't just decide that they are unhappy with the moderation by youtube and replace them with an other moderation team. They can leave youtube, but then they also loose access to existing subscribers on the site. Youtube users can also not decided they are unhappy with the moderation of youtube and whitelist videos or channels that youtube have blocked. They can leave youtube, but then the channels also need to leave or the user will loose access to videos. The distinction between centralized power and decentralized power is how much power each actor has in the system. In a decentralized system the user control who they want to see, the content creator control who can access their content, and the network control what content the network will advertise to users. In a centralized system the network control everything, and neither the user or content creator can overrule the network.

the_gastropod 3y ago

The Nostr website basically makes fun of this aspect of Mastodon. https://nostr.com/comparisons/mastodon https://nostr.com/comparisons/mastodon

askonomm 3y ago
Oh, well, I should've read the fine print. My bad.

_heimdall 3y ago

This is the kicker people reaching for federation miss. Federation just means you may have more moderators running around moderating more copies of all the same data. Federation has a few pros for sure, but avoiding moderation isn't one of them. If anything its harder to know who is doing the moderating and where to look if you think things may be quietly being banned or buried.

belorn 3y ago

The major difference is that people can choose a different network if they are unhappy with the moderation from any specific network. A channel on youtube can't just decide that they are unhappy with the moderation by youtube and replace them with an other moderation team. They can leave youtube, but then they also loose access to existing subscribers on the site. Youtube users can also not decided they are unhappy with the moderation of youtube and whitelist videos or channels that youtube have blocked. They can leave youtube, but then the channels also need to leave or the user will loose access to videos. The distinction between centralized power and decentralized power is how much power each actor has in the system. In a decentralized system the user control who they want to see, the content creator control who can access their content, and the network control what content the network will advertise to users. In a centralized system the network control everything, and neither the user or content creator can overrule the network.