3 ms·
I think the limitation is more technical than you make it seem. Why is there no network-level decentralization for social networks? Because P2P connections have
by dkyc 12y ago
I think the limitation is more technical than you make it seem. Why is there no network-level decentralization for social networks? Because P2P connections have a habit of being unstable, unreliable and hard to initiate. What if your desired peer is offline at the moment? Would be very convenient to store the information somewhere. A server in the middle just works. The primary reason not to use a server is because there is an inherent disadvantage/distrust in a central authority (à la Bitcoin). Apparently for social networks this is not an issue for 99.9% of people.
- EGreg 12y agoBut why do we HAVE to use the servers at facebook as the server in the middle "pubsubhubbub" as a protocol would let you choose your "hub" in general, any publisher of information could designate one or more computers to store the data redundantly, and even encrypt it so that only my friends with the key can decrypt it. that's how the web works btw
- mvp 12y agoIs there a way to just centralize friends only? And then other providers provide every other service?