Agree 100%, as a rule of thumb, if you agree on almost all that you see in your instance or with your peers, and you don’t experience some level “being triggered” rest assured you are on an ecco chamber. But is true that sometimes you want some really specific content, that is when it is useful a non generalistic instance.

That name, that just made my day

Briar.

“I’ll wear them down.”

Is there any alternatove protocol?

P2P social networks would be any good in that regard? 🤔

Really? Would that imply too much of code re-writing?

I’ll take a look at the WebRTC thing, thanks

I wonder if that concept can be made in a distributed manner, like P2P

Nice!

Is really nice, I think it is a few featires away from compeating 1v1 with matrix (and XMPP? don’t know, since I didn test it out jist yet)

Really nice stuff

Great!. It looks like it is really new and developing

Thanks!

I’ll have to give it a try

I wonder how XMPP compares to Jami

I like how you think, but I don’t really know where to start to do it myselfe, or the kind of skills I need to develop it

I understand your logic but if part of the mutual agreement is “I will ask you to do things and you will do it” that is a fair agreement if mutually choosen. Maybe a silly one but fair nonetheless, unther the logic we’re talking about.

I don’t have any complain into falling into capitalism, quite on the contray, and I wouldn say that is “unfair” the “adventage”, just be a more required worker to balance things out or if you can cope with the challenge take the risk of being the provider of capital (either an employer or a member of a cooperative)

For personal use or trusted peers Syncthing is just AMAZING, and they keep adding new usefull features like encription for storage on non-trusted devices

Thanks for the info! I’ll chek it out!

I was thinking about a bottorrent node on the tron network, is a decentraliced file storage sistem, never heard of Cubbit.

Item 1.2 you say capitalism can’t provide what you want, then in item 1.3 you literaly describes the fundamentals of capitalism (individual and freedom of assosiation) , forget the widspread missunderstanding of capitalism, please.

2.3 “non-owned” on the contrary if you set it up as a common resoirced it will be over used and underprovided, is recommended to have even more property rights in a distributed manner (give it a look at “the tragedy of commons” if you whant more details). Suggestion, aim for a decentraliced-ISP model based on a reward sistem in wich you gain tockens by sharing resources (bandwith, storage, etc…) and to use the service you need to pay with that tocken, maybe a DAO (decentraliced autonomous organization) is a good example of the governance of such sistem.

2.4 I will ignore the communist connotatiom fo the term “control of means of productiom” but, paradoxically the more propertie rights you have (im the sense of more people owning a tiny fractiom of the resoirce needed to run such thing) the more control in the meams of production and since it theor property they have incentives to mantein it (unlyke the common resources), so again I would say, try to solve it with more ownership but a distrybuted one, and arramge the incentives towards that.

Another thing to consider in this item:

Why people would invest their hard earned resources into mantein the metwork, if ‘other’ will do it for them for free? Is not a trivial question (that logic aplies for all, so you get the idea).

Now what I really liked :D

That aside, I like the approach you propose, in item 3 I will say that in general is a good start for setting the bases of a distributed internet but, have in mind that often people, given the chance will choose a centralized and privative service just becaus it is convenient for them, and that is ok (for them) simply becaus people have different interest and priorities, and there is not much we can (nor have to) do in that regard.

At this moment a variety of implementation of decentraliced ISP for an intranet/internet are being develop (if you whant I can look up for the names of proyects), same goes for decentraliced apps, cryptocurrencies, etc… I really belive that main idea of what you say will be a necessity at some point, not just an option.

The incentives of themocracy are really poor, high time preference and the beliving that we can solve our problems at the expense of others, plus is a sistem that imposes what the mayority whants (and nothing prevents the mayority from wanting terrible things)