I wrote about how I cannot understand why anyone is interested in joining a new centralized social media platform when we now have a great opportunity to move to protocols instead of platforms. https://www.techdirt.com/2022/12/21/why-would-anyone-use-another-centralized-social-media-service-after-this/
Why Would Anyone Use Another Centralized Social Media Service After This?

So, it’s been quite a year for legacy, centralized social media — and all without any really big change to the laws that govern it (yet — the EU’s are coming into force shortly, but pos…

Techdirt

@mmasnick
The move to centralized services has been primarily driven by user experience. Less choices, less work to get the use case I want accomplished. That's why

Many of us remember the early internet which was totally decentralized, protocol-driven.Your gmail example is a good one. Designing a decentralized user experience that has less friction than a controlled one is very hard and frankly if it's a choice to do the easier thing vs something that is slightly harder but offers more flexibility, they will choose the first unless there is some extremely compelling driver

@funcuddles yeah, i spent a lot of time talking about that in the protocols/platforms paper

@mmasnick @funcuddles

You mean the experience of getting hacked (actually being sold by hotmail for example) your email contact list to send invites to all of your friends telling them to join fb without your concies consent?

There is a saying that germans have a word for everything.
What you are doing we call "Geschichtsklitterung".

sry

@bitpickup @mmasnick

Hey, don't shoot the messenger! As someone who works in infosec I really wish that [central service getting hacked] changed user behaviors/drivers to favor decentralization and other behaviors that reduce risk, but it generally doesn't sadly. My point is that most people favor convenience above almost everything else, which is why this is not just a technical problem to solve, but a people problem. The evolution to where we are has evolved organically from these drivers, especially when you think of the trajectory of the internet of late 90s-mid-2000s to now (i.e. internet consumption that is much more centralized).

@funcuddles

Sry if that sounded offensive but it is important to understand how "they" became what they are now.

Your "outfit" right now reflects a "generation facebook" with real name policy for example, or as Palihapitiya put's it:
"You have been programmed."

In my eyes googles free email offer, financed by "reading" the privat email, was criminal by existing laws.
Same goes for fb deals for email contacts.

There are no TOS that can justify such criminal behavior, only interests important enough to prevent proper legal prosecution.

Once the advantage was there, they had VC and enough data to expand the monopoly to a position of total data totalitarianism.
Aquisition of whatsapp and Instagram are just the tip of the iceberg of those mechanisms.

[central service getting hacked] was a deal between companies interchanging stocks for private information of their users.

@funcuddles

I just published a post, to a certain extent related to this.

They committed the crime to bring people "to their door step", from there "it was all down hill".

https://troet.cafe/@bitpickup/109559608362853190

mʕ•ﻌ•ʔm bitPickup (@[email protected])

#brainstorming #mastodon #fediVerse #promotion #evolution Now that we had an external promoter that brought a lot of people "to our door step", let's think about what to do to walk on and create what we are looking for: https://youtu.be/raIUQP71SBU?t=577 time stamp minute 9:37 (I don't care if you like Chamath or not, so please spear me with comments in that direction. This is about to learn and think about experiences in the past, nothing else)

troet.cafe - Mastodon