The “De” In “Decentralization” Stands For “Democracy”

Comments

• CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  So it means “democracy centralization?” That doesn’t really sound like a good thing either.

  source

  • Umbrias@beehaw.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    an attempt was made

    source
• MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  No it fucken doesn’t.

  source
• slacktoid@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  OK this one hurt my brain

  source
• Jayjader@jlai.lu ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Succinctly put, though I got some cognitive dissonance when the author wrote about bluesky being their choice of decentralized network to get involved with without even mentioning the hosting costs involved with running a bsky relay (or whichever component of the ATP network actually holds the data “firehose”).

  According to this article it took a server that costs around $150/month over 4 days to spin up a working relay, most of which was spent ingurgitating half a terabyte of data (that’s what ended up on disk in any case). Far from exorbitant, yet if I want to self host for my own personal needs it’s still gobs more data and compute than any activity pub software needs.

  Maybe my view of “decentralization as in democracy” is just fundamentally different from the author’s. I get the feeling that to them, as long as each friend group has 1 self-hoster in it then democracy through decentralization is preserved. This would make sense that they orient themselves towards something like bluesky and the AT protocol. Personally, I don’t think we should be satisfied with that level of decentralization/democracy - it’s a nice start, but we should strive for reaching at least 50% of people self-hosting an activity pub instance to truly achieve the type of decentralization that serves democracy. Of course, I’m not aware of any activity pub software that can be selfhosted by even 10% of the population, currently, so there’s definitely a lot of work to do before my vision is feasible.

  source