The problem with fully distributed p2p solutions for ALL THE THINGS is that half the world doesn't even have unlimited bandwidth at home, and virtually nobody does on mobile. I would argue that the vast majority of people likely don't want to spend their data plans or batteries on other people's data transfers.
Happy to hear about solutions to this problem, but I don't remember seeing a lot of people tackling these fundamental issues.
"But Râu, it's only a matter of time until the Internet is a free resource all around us."
Yeah, how did that go so far? Not saying it's impossible, but with current regulations creating and perpetuating oligopolies everywhere, I don't see this happening anytime soon.
... also, it still doesn't address the battery/CPU/memory question.
@raucao all good points but not reasons not to develop comprehensive p2p solutions because not everyone needs to run a node in order to use such systems. Not with safenetwork.tech anyway.
On the other hand Safe aims to allow nodes to participate according to their capabilities and be rewarded for their different contributions. Just aspirations at this point, but achievable because they've been in mind from the beginning.
@SAFEpress I'm using and developing p2p solutions myself, so I'm not telling anyone not to. I'm just saying that fundamental issues with mainstream adoption are widely ignored by the various communities in my opinion. Also, p2p can be a spectrum. As you say, end users don't necessarily have to run nodes, but it can make the rest of the network more resilient.
@raucao not disagreeing with any of the points you've made, just wanted to add that there are P2P solutions to those issues IMO.
@raucao and consider the effect of nodes being rewarded for providing connectivity, providing the infrastructure itself. It becomes possible to imagine a way around the oligarchies of the internet, or to limit their power through decentralised competition.
More democratisation that just decentralisation 😎
@SAFEpress People also don't like to pay for services, so that's actually the same issue I described, just from a different angle.
@raucao agreed, but this isn't a killer either:
- most will be able to earn their use (on Safe)
- more people are willing to pay as the noose is tightened, for privacy, for open accessible services, for control and autonomy, to avoid ads, propaganda, to participate in communities which own themselves and the value they create etc etc
It will start small, but it does have the potential to grow and maybe become an alternative. 1/2
@raucao I'm noticing how much more willing I am to make mastodon work for me after a pause of three years.
The functionality is much the same, it's more responsive, the community seems better, but my motivation to leave twitter is much much higher - despite the fact I have it tuned to be a fantastic resource for me.
So I'm looking into creating bots so I can still use key Twitter accounts as sources, but from here. 2/2
@SAFEpress I agree. However, don't forget about the massive wealth gaps between people around the world. What you're willing to pay is completely unaffordable for someone else. But with p2p, a lot of this can of course be solved by creating local communities around local nodes. Especially as hardware gets cheaper and cheaper.
@SAFEpress ... In fact, we're working on providing co-operatively run services and accounts with @kosmos as I write this. So I'm very much a fan of paying the right people to do the right things, instead of everything being ad-based privacy nightmares. It's enough if it works for enough people. We don't need 100% adoption, or even mainstream adoption IMO.
@SAFEpress But we need things to be inter-operable between our communities.
@raucao I agree that interoperability is necessary. There's a problem though if ensuring that shuts off valuable technical avenues and the benefits available through them.
There's a set of fundamentals underlying Safe which direct the technical solution, and which necessarily cause difficulties for interoperability - though not irreparably so.
For example my work to put Solid on Safe may help restore interoperability where it has necessarily been made harder in the short term
@raucao that's not lost in me, although I don't claim to understand it very well or know how to solve it. So maybe I'm wrong, but I'm optimistic that p2p can help with this.
There is a danger that corporations will capture those users with freebies as Facebook tried to do in India. The pushback against that is a reason for us to keep on and provide alternatives before that approach succeeds.
@SAFEpress Too late. This is what already happened in most developing countries. Now the obstacle is even harder: you need to convince people that paying for something they currently get for free is better!
@SAFEpress FB, Twitter etc. are financing their data usage for those services for people right now. You need to convince them that both paying for their own data, as well as accounts, and maybe even other people's data, is somehow better than using the current stuff for free.
@SAFEpress Good luck with having someone on the countryside in Uganda use an app that requires IPFS on the phone. Not happening.
@raucao all true. I'm not saying this isn't a problem. It makes me angry!
On the plus side I think there are fundamental flaws in those models that mean that if we build systems which don't have those flaws, they'll be replaced in the long run and we may be the pioneers in that respect.
We should maintain the vision of that person in Uganda using the systems we're working on, and because we did it, them bringing some great benefits to humanity.
That's what drives the man behind Safe.
@raucao Ubiquitous computing done with "sand" or small ICs capable of extracting energy from RF/Photons/MechanicalEnergy that relay comms in all directions creating a true worldnet mesh. Could even float on water too, and bridge sea gaps. One day...
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!