|
|
|
|
|
|
by fedorhk
1989 days ago
|
|
|
> My concern is that, while seizing control of social networking from big corporations is surely a great idea, it may be initially inundated (and thus, socially formulated) by the same whackjob culture that flocked to Parler from Twitter.
> How can we ensure that balanced and healthy communities form on the decentralized web? Sigh. The problem with all decentralized platforms/solutions is that they're focused on "decentralized", not on "platform". So high level plan should be:
1. Make platform that actually compete with w/ FB, Twitter, etc.
2. Decentralize it. |
|
|
You can't build a successful platform and then decentralize it.
The means must fit the ends.
Why do you want decentralized infrastructure? Why would users want it? Why should they care about the problems you see with centralized systems? How do you monetize your platform?
Let's put this on it's head and pretend we are GAFAM:
Q: Why is our successful platform centrally governed?
A: So we can more easily extract data from the accumulated userbase.
Remember, our product isn't the service, but the data extracted from the users. And the users aren't our customers either, they are livestock. And our actual customers are the advertisers that pay us.
This means, for a successful new platform: you need a product. You need something that is valueable for the user from the getgo.
After you found something useful, you can think about how to connect the insular instances of your application to make the product even better without compromising the users' control over their content.