4 ms·
Which is why it isn't each node that is the commons, but the entirety of the ecosystem.
by eitland 2y ago
Which is why it isn't each node that is the commons, but the entirety of the ecosystem.
- pessimizer 2y agoYou're collateralizing bad mortgages and rating them AAA. I think the central question is how people can collectively own a node and organize its decision making. Federation of dictatorships is not a democracy, it's feudalism.
- MichaelZuo 2y agoHuh that’s a great way of putting it. These ‘federated’ systems are just recreating feudalism in cyberspace. Edit: Well even worse in some ways, since it’s not like a majority of the ‘gentry’ and ‘nobles’ could challenge and seize control of e.g. a Mastodon instance from the owner.
- anonymous_sorry 2y agoYou're in danger of making the perfect the enemy of the good. Email is far from perfect, but good enough and its federated nature means it's reasonable for institutions to use it as a default mode of communication and authentication. What exactly is the alternative to federation? Is it possible for everyone to be their own admin? In any case, under feudalism serfs didn't have the freedom to choose and switch their feudal lord as they saw fit.
- throwawaymaths 2y agoYour statement quietly assumes that being able to accurately call it a "commons" is desirable. Who cares, it might be good even if it's not a commons.
- anonymous_sorry 2y agoI assumed that private or corporate control over something that becomes a default communications network is undesirable, because that was a basis for the discussion I was replying to. I also believe it. I don't want to have to subject myself to the X dumpster fire or sign away my data to Facebook just to receive communications from my local police department or child's school.