Bitcoin Forum

https://www.forbes.com/sites/yoavvilner/2019/05/08/a-distributed-internet-what-is-it-good-for/#130eb4384bae

I found this article a fascinating read. Discussing topics and projects that can help make the internet more private and decentralized. I even like the idea  of owning your own domain on the blockchain which would be controlled directly by the owner instead of being censored.

All hopeful things to see in the near future. Thoughts?

We definitely do want a more decentralized internet and social platforms. The fact that our personal data has become an asset to many is really backwards. I also think that the more centralized something becomes the less we have to think for ourselves. Look at China.

The fact that Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, and others are clamping down on free speech, shows that the Left is on it's last legs, taking its final stand.

How old are any of the above? Twenty years? Already there are many apps that are doing the same as these big brave leaders. Soon they will become defunct, because they won't be able to keep up with the decentralized alternatives.

Amazon is banning books.

8)

The problem is that corporations like google and facebook together with governments are generaly in charge or todays internet and it seems like they are not interesting in providing more privacy and decentralization. Such global changes should be implemented from their side. Otherwise, all new private services would be banned or simply won't handle the competition with corporations.
No one would allow you to make a private internet.

When Facebook is centralized, we can see so many people abusing it so why do we need a decentralized version? People post death threats, abuses, spread false curfue rumors and some users have posted their suicide video on Facebook. They couldn't manage controlling these issues so I can just imagine what will happen when people have freedom of speech. Just because some famous people were banned, it doesn't sound logical and it's not even possible to have a decentralized social media website. Government will be first to ban it.

I feel like if we actually needed a more decentralized version of facebook, the project Mithril would have been a success by now (rather than a Binance chain merge flatliner) or Steemit would have expanded much further before cutting the majority of its staff.

Maybe in the future a decentralized facebook will be successful, but right now everyone seems content enough with existing social media services, so competitors don't get much opportunity even if there service offer is a little better. The service offer needs to be much much better for people to shift their online presence to a brand new platform.

Did anyone read that recent article in the NYT by Chris Hughes about taking down Facebook? I thought it might be relevant to this thread: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/09/opinion/sunday/chris-hughes-facebook-zuckerberg.html?fbclid=IwAR2RuARTYU-SgCnd7vK18XVVtgBRHXN0RF7ts5lBrt50Q9Upcuv-OtrWQh4

it's also a really fascinating read

We need more decentralized platforms that would probably reward the users for using their platforms.
For sure, not like Facebook. I think that Facebook is dead and the platforms that people use nowadays are more like Twitter, Instagram etc that you don't have to read a lot of text.

I think at this point many people want an alternative, problem is the social media giants have indeed become to big that they either buy out arising competitors or hold a smear campaign against them. I'm still surprised at the amount of people claiming FB don't have a hold on them, not knowing the Instagram they use is owned by the same company.


Quite ironic indeed for a company that started as an online bookseller.


I've only seen the video on NYT YT channel. Not quite sure how the government would go with that though. There's also the danger that FB instead becomes a mouthpiece for the government once they are the one regulating it. You can get banned and FB can simply shrug and say "take the government to court, they're the one who banned you".

I agree. I think people's attention spans are much smaller so a quick scroll through pictures (Instagram) or a snapshot of a thought (twitter) are what people are craving. I think the messaging aspect is really important to people too- messenger, DMs or something like wechat. I hope we can have a private messaging app someday- I believe that is what elixxir is trying to add as their first dapp

Of course we need more decentralized social media it's very important in today's world even for businesses not just for private persons
Deplatforming shouldn't be able to happen anymore, we need a decentralized solution for that

The underlying problem is that FaceBook (and other major social media sites) have an oligopoly over social media, and a monopoly over their specific types of platforms.

The (market based) reason these companies can ban these people they disagree with is because there are no alternatives for people to go to for those who disagree with the decision to ban those people.

The "solutions" described in the article in the OP (and by others) involve *nothing* being removed ever, regardless of how harmful or bad the content is. I don't think this is a good solution because there is some content that really, reasonably *should not* be on social media.

I don't think decentralization on facebook will be possible because they are making money from selling all our information to the other corporate.Mark didn't run this company for providing free connectivity to all the people. :D

It's not about making facebook decentralised but to have an decentralized alternative to facebook and other social media sites which are pretty important these days

It's already time for a new social media become popular and replace Facebook. They aren't only a centralized platform, but a criminal one, as they were caught more than once selling personal informations of the platform users.
Unfortunatelly many promoters still need that platform to earn money and share their services as the main and potential customers are there. I think these tech millionaires who are also talking about crypto currency should try creating or boosting a decentralized or less authoritarian strict social media to replace Facebook.

There is no point of Decentralization as if you want you can already go full private stuff. you can even have your own private internet but does it fulfill all your needs, in the end, you will always need some interaction with the famous sites so there is no point of trying these shits. people need a private blockchain but mostly they gonna use the public network.

there cant be a decentralised version of facebook only a different facebook,

so jes people could be in various communities,

That's incredibly childish, and dangerous

There's nothing anyone can do to stop others doing things you think are "bad" or "harmful", this is the real world with real adults, who have different and thus sometimes conflicting opinions.


Your argument ends with constant brain scans to check that people aren't thinking anything "wrong", there is absolutely no reason why not using such authoritarian logic. And obviously Bitcoin isn't allowed in this brave new world of yours, someone might use it of something "bad" or "harmful"

If that can be proposed and offered properly it will attract and have more people's interest, a platform where people will earned from patronizing and using the site, unlike FB which they are the only one who manage to earned a lot, it's good to have something that offers services which will give a share of profits to everyone.

this is definitely a interesting topic of discussion because of the freedom of speech this country allows us to have. This should extend all the way to the internet but we have moderators that edit what is being said (reddit for example) Does this mean it's still centralized too? I would be interested to see how the unstoppable domain websites pan out and to what extent people will take it without moderation

Honestly, a more decentralized internet in general would be amazing in general.
I prefer the online space being more of a wild west of sorts, say whatever you want, post whatever you want...etc. Granted, I do have my nostalgia-goggles on, the way the internet used to be was a lot more fun to me compared to how it is today.
Kinda defeats the purpose of social media when you start censoring people/speech, never really kept up with Alex Jones, but how he was deplatformed was a scary precedent to set.

When I think about stuff like this, I always think that we're never going to be truly decentralized. There are certain things on the internet that is going to be popular to police, such as child porn, crime related activities, etc. If we're truly decentralized, we're not going to be able to police things like this.

That's going to aggravate law enforcement, regular people on the internet, and so on and so forth.

So the answer to that is to have some moderation, nothing too crazy but SOME. But then this moderation gets larger and larger over time, and there's really nothing that is done to stop it. That's just how it goes. We've reached the point where moderation (and censorship) on the internet are going so far to a point that people are attempting to take a stand against it.

I see so many replies here but no one is thinking on below lines.



We need impartial media, not the decentralized one. Democracy/decentralization is dangerous thing if the "hands" participating in it overpower the "heads" that are supposed to make good decision.

People like to socialize. They like to get together and share all kinds of things. They all get different ideas this way, and find useful info. It's fun to socialize.

That's all Facebook is for. Why not decentralize it so that people can do what they like without the restraints of a big corporation? or the fears that they might be kicked out on a whim of  management?

8)