it's actually eroded community in MP games, and I'd argue it does much the same in social media situations

outside of stuff like, say, the ability to cluster within facebook groups

A.I. is an actual blank slate. It is trained by real people, i.e. ADL and Anita Sarkesian & friends.

Here's what I'm thinking: You can have small communities and leave/join them all within a single technical platform (as you can have multiple families that don't ever really interact within one apartment complex).

Many distributed systems on a technical level though (especially in telecoms) aren't actually that distributed. (ex: Google servers are everywhere and function in a distributed manner to serve up webpages--but it's all under Google)

why would you want central control over the technical platform?

actually better question: why add another layer of infrastructure when this already just sounds like you're gunning for pre-twitter?

You don't but these things happen. The reason I bring it up is that alot of people think something like Bitcoin or torrent infrastructure will be a savior.

thats because it gets away from the need for regular hosting

which is the only reason why the platform wars exist really

But it still fails to address the conditions that led to the centralized internet in the first place--people are lazy and congregate and cluster.

Blockchain is just a potentially trendy, really nice medium for p2p services. Torrents are just a nice way of democratizing content hosting

same thing happens on a government level. I'm not convinced it lasts, which is why I want to seek out local solutions

and by lasts I mean I dont think it's stable

blockchain is the foundation upon which the potential for an individualist future rests.

I'm not saying Blockchain won't help. But I think you'll still envitably end up with de-facto concentrated content curation.

que?

People will make places that make it easy to congregate and discuss. The fact that you have distributed hosting won't change that. You'll also tend to have people and organizations that command more respect.

I will say, there's a problem people don't want to address. The world *is* connected now. Local control is better for political independence, but ultimately, with economies of scale, it is very, very hard to play isolationist now.

The fight should not be abandoned simply because the block chain exists. For all of it's permanence, it still has vulnerabilities. So long as a decentralized system is built upon a centralized foundation, there are clear vulnerabilities.

This is the issue I have with the fetishization of Bitcoin and the block chain as Ancap Jesus. It's built several tiers in on centralized systems. It's not finished.

The network infrastructure is still maintained by corporations. Ones that still rely on central banking systems.

Could you point to an instance where anyone said the overall fight should be abandoned? Other than maybe accelerationist Arch

That was a general thought being expressed

Ah

I was addressing a cockiness I've seen in the past when bringing up vulnerabilities in the block chain.

Not necessarily addressing anyone specific, just an attitude that's dangerous in the scenario

My argument is, and has consistently been, that resources should he expended as efficiently as possible. I don't see twitter as a good investment overall. I was simply pointing out the growth of systems wherein hosting is decentralized, which works against central curation

At worst you'll get "only you are hosting your stuff"

And that in itself is a problem. Self reliance still requires participation from an astounding amount of other people.

And yet it's the only real solution to the problem we have that doesn't exacerbate the same issues in other sectors. Maybe we just have to accept that we can't reach all people all the time in an instant

And even at that, the amount of people who think that you host your own stuff at the pleasure of your local jurisdiction is staggering, too.

What do you mean by that exactly?

I mean, if your stuff is hosted from your own system, and that system is taken from you

You've lost everything.

Ah

Right, which is why I'm rather stringent about protection of property, and why I encourage others to be as well

The trouble with tech is that the more you have, the more vulnerable you are.

Oh for sure

How many people could survive if the internet disappeared overnight?

How many wouldn't be able to function?

Probably a lot to be honest. I think most people's "reliance" is superficial