there is a blockchain protocol coming called "Mainframe", it's completely censorship resistant, they show that nothing can stop it.

I tried mastadon, it was annoying to use

it's easier for me than twitter <:shrug_raka:430185885988945921>

I think the important distinction is between decentralization of content and decentralization of _control_. As long as control remains centralized, you are responsible, because you can kill a post, regardless of how decentralized. However, if control was decentralized, even if storage was centralized (albeit that is less likely), you have protection, usually.

https://mainframe.com

mainframe will turn the world on its head

I will read over it.

unstopabble censorship resistance

i'm not invested, just think it sounds solid

i probably should invest

But yes, I think something like blockchain could be a truly decentralized basis for a service. Even Bitchute, despite using Web Torrent, could be forced to take down a video, because they have control over the post itself, i.e. can remove it from their website.

not on mainframe, which is problematic as well.. imagine kiddie porn shops that setup on mainframe and can't be stopped etc

Technically, if BitChute was forced to "delete a video", the tracker that they use, which I believe is public, would still list the video and you could continue sharing it, with the same magnet link, but the video posting itself would be gone from the BitChute site, i.e. it would no longer show up for the user's channel or show up through a search on the BitChute site, because control over that is in BitChute's hands.

However, then you might as well simply share your videos as torrents. You are still basically deplatformed from BitChute, if they gave in.

I cannot think of a single framework that is like a web site where control is 100% decentralized, but maybe what you just posted is such an exception (reading now).

yeah what i posted is it

apps can be built on it that are unstoppable

As for Mastodon, I actually really, really like the concept. GNU Social is even nicer. It seems to have made a very conscious decision to use very established web concepts, such as using digest authentication (the one where you can embed user:pw in the URL) instead of something fancy like OAuth.

i just hate any system having human moderators

always bias

always exerting control

The API is incredibly simple, with posting an image, for example, being a simple HTTP POST, returning an ID in JSON, and you can then reference that ID in a post to attach it. It's the simplest API I have programmed against so far, out of Mastodon, Gab, Minds, Steemit, Twitter, and Facebook.

but it can be censored right?

someone is in control

Hmm ... let me think.

Yes, the isntance admin could censor.

"Our unique network design prevents data from ever being tracked or censored. dApps continue to live on Mainframe whether governments, tech giants, or we want them to."

Federation is controlled through a central repository, with many instances already blacklisted.

But, federation "only" affects whether or not posts of one instance show up on other, federated instances.

Wait, let me re-read some source code.

gotta run for now, interesting stuff tho

Okay, I'll dump it for here, for later.

Ah, here it is. I was wrong. It uses HTTP Basic authentication.

So, it's by far the simplest to program against. Basically made to rely on only the most basic, old school web protocols.

https://github.com/UndeadMockingbird/AltTech/blob/master/api_wrappers/gnusocialapi/gnusocialapi/gnusocialapi.py

i'd rather have oauth tokens with scopes ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Yeah ... hmm.

Well, it has its use, of course, or nobody would put in the extra effort, but it's nice having basic auth.

also

> fucking xml

xml?