[dogma1138]

1) your content and posts are online it doesn't prevent anyone from copying them, not to mention that while you can design a blockchain and that allows you to permanently delete content it doesn't prevent anyone from storing revisions of the blockchain that had that content or republishing that content again; sure it won't be signed with your key but those drunk photos you took during spring break will still be there.

2) There is still a single point of censorship; distributed internet isn't distributed unless you control the physical infrastructure a government can simply shut your blockchain down.

3) RSS

4) What does this has to do with a blockchain?

Again nothing here requires a blockchain, some of it might actually be harder to implement in the manner you speak off with one.

[Terr_]

> Again nothing here requires a blockchain

Yes. That's intentional. Did you read my post fully before replying?

[delinka]

I read you both and I didn't see you address the primary question:

Why do you need a block chain for a decentralized social network?

[Terr_]

You seem to be having problem following the conversation. Please look at the first two sentences of Dogma1138's post, which contain two questions: (A) Why blockchain (B) Why decentralized.

My reply can be summarized as: (A) I agree, blockchain isn't needed (B) ...but decentralization can help in these areas.