3 ms·

This is a different type of centralisation, though. WhatsApp isn't running out of a single data centre (I hope).

cies 2y ago
It's not that different. Whatsapp controls nearly everything: servers, clients, protocol. Matrix has open protocols, several implementation of the clients/servers, and people can start their own server node. In the comparison to TCP/IP this is quite similar. You can add to the network without needing approval of a central institution.
- robertlagrant 2y ago
  > Whatsapp controls nearly everything: servers, clients, protocol. This is nothing to do with resilience in the face of things being destroyed in a war. That's what I'm saying: it's not the same sort of centralisation. > In the comparison to TCP/IP this is quite similar. You can add to the network without needing approval of a central institution. I can join WhatsApp without approval as well. But also - how like that is TCP/IP? All IP addresses have to be agreed and assigned, do they not?
  - batch12 2y ago
    WhatsApp can be turned off tomorrow as a result of a war or the whim of an executive. > I can join WhatsApp without approval as well You absolutely need approval to join WhatsApp. Approval and a phone number. > All IP addresses have to be agreed and assigned, do they not You can assign your own IPs and have your own network if you want.
TeMPOraL 2y ago
It is the centralization type that matters. Obligatory reminder that the whole "Internet routes around censorship" like it routes around glassed data centres during nuclear war, etc. applies to layers 3-4 of ISO/OSI model. The problematic centralization of the Internet happens at layer 7.
ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
>This is a different type of centralisation, though Not really. There's a single entity that controls WhatsApp and so the entire service can be stopped by threatening/sabotaging that single entity.
deepbluev7 2y ago
But Matrix works fine if a hospital disconnects itself from the internet because of some DDoS or hacking attack. WhatsApp doesn't, because you can't host it on-prem. I am not sure about if governments have that use case, but we certainly have seen it in hospitals. (And even then, there are benefits of having patient data only on specific servers in specific environments, even if they are encrypted, because if you use WhatsApp to talk to your doctor, Meta will know about that. And I am pretty sure governments can appreciate such features as well.)

cies 2y ago

It's not that different. Whatsapp controls nearly everything: servers, clients, protocol. Matrix has open protocols, several implementation of the clients/servers, and people can start their own server node. In the comparison to TCP/IP this is quite similar. You can add to the network without needing approval of a central institution.

robertlagrant 2y ago
> Whatsapp controls nearly everything: servers, clients, protocol. This is nothing to do with resilience in the face of things being destroyed in a war. That's what I'm saying: it's not the same sort of centralisation. > In the comparison to TCP/IP this is quite similar. You can add to the network without needing approval of a central institution. I can join WhatsApp without approval as well. But also - how like that is TCP/IP? All IP addresses have to be agreed and assigned, do they not?
- batch12 2y ago
  WhatsApp can be turned off tomorrow as a result of a war or the whim of an executive. > I can join WhatsApp without approval as well You absolutely need approval to join WhatsApp. Approval and a phone number. > All IP addresses have to be agreed and assigned, do they not You can assign your own IPs and have your own network if you want.

TeMPOraL 2y ago

It is the centralization type that matters. Obligatory reminder that the whole "Internet routes around censorship" like it routes around glassed data centres during nuclear war, etc. applies to layers 3-4 of ISO/OSI model. The problematic centralization of the Internet happens at layer 7.

ndsipa_pomu 2y ago

>This is a different type of centralisation, though Not really. There's a single entity that controls WhatsApp and so the entire service can be stopped by threatening/sabotaging that single entity.

deepbluev7 2y ago

But Matrix works fine if a hospital disconnects itself from the internet because of some DDoS or hacking attack. WhatsApp doesn't, because you can't host it on-prem. I am not sure about if governments have that use case, but we certainly have seen it in hospitals. (And even then, there are benefits of having patient data only on specific servers in specific environments, even if they are encrypted, because if you use WhatsApp to talk to your doctor, Meta will know about that. And I am pretty sure governments can appreciate such features as well.)