all media is

we need decentralized internet yesterday

WIKIPEDIA IS NO DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER TYPE

THE INTERNET WILL CENTRALIZE BECAUSE ACTUAL INDEPENDENT THINKING IS RARE

PEOPLE NEED SOMETHING TO FOLLOW

GOOGLE CAME ABOUT FOR A REASON

THE CATHEDRAL IS CAREERISM

What are you talking about ?

Wikipedia isn't media. It's a crowd sourced encyclopaedias.

Rational wiki is the overtly liberally biased one.

in my view they are both overtly liberally biased

just to different levels of obnoxious blatancy

WIKIPEDIA IS HEAVILY BIASED

RATIONALWIKI IS STRAIGHT UP UNCONCEALED PROPGANDA

rationalwiki is r/fullcommunism, wikipedia is the news anchor going "well OBVIOUSLY we all want a society that's EQUAL!"

GOOD ANALOGY

WIKIPEDIA IS MAINSTREAM LEFTISM

RATIONALWIKI IS CHE GUEVARA LITE

minus the nigger hate

wait so elaborate on your notion of google as something emerging in response to peoples' demand for a centralized source

elaborate on your notion of spread vs centralized

I mean, on the one hand you are right, if today's normal fucking retards were given full meshnet, google would take it over in 2 weeks

2 weeks into alpha testing, no less

but on the other hand, is there a reason tech like that, that is inherently difficult to censor, couldn't help something?

I mean I always envision a worst case outcome of it, like google takes it all over and installs protocols on every device to block everyone they dislike

and all the devices triangulate the location of the machines relaying crimethought

"By using Google and its affiliates you agree to our Terms of Service*"

then everyone hits "agree" and it says "you agree to let us silently install a package blocking an ever updated list of people we don't like from your relay"

I mean that's an obvious evolution, decentralized so people compete by trying to re-establish exclusivity

THE PROBLEM IS

IN MY VIEW

THAT PEOPLE NEED SOMETHING TO IMITATE AND FOLLOW

SO GIVEN A DECENTRALIZED NET

YOU HAVE A BUNCH OF NORMIES YELLING AT EACH OTHER

"WELL THIS SOURCE SAYS"

SO THEY START TO THINK, "WE NEED A DEFINITIVE SOURCE"

MAINLY BECAUSE THEY NEED TO BE TOLD WHAT TO THINK

THEY CANNOT TRUST ARGUMENT ITSELF TO REVEAL WHAT IS CLEAR

SO THEY WOULD INVENT WIKIPEDIA AGAIN

of course

the question is not whether the herd gonna herd, it's what option leads to a better fate for all 5 of us left who prefer to draw our own conclusions