pull down to refresh

I can't read this all right now, but I'm drooling over the citations alone (emphasis mine):
First, let us examine Mark Nottingham's IETF independent submission, RFC 9518: Centralization, Decentralization, and Internet Standards. Mark Nottingham has a long and respected history of participating in standards, and most of his work history is doing so for fairly sizable corporate participants. From the title, one might think it a revolutionary call-to-arms towards decentralization, but that isn't what the RFC does at all. Instead, Nottingham's piece is best summarized by its own words:
This document argues that, while decentralized technical standards may be necessary to avoid centralization of Internet functions, they are not sufficient to achieve that goal because centralization is often caused by non-technical factors outside the control of standards bodies. As a result, standards bodies should not fixate on preventing all forms of centralization; instead, they should take steps to ensure that the specifications they produce enable decentralized operation.
I took a quick look at Bluecry page the other day. Looks interesting but the talk about reporting "abuse" intrigued me as I wonder how they handle it without centralizing.
reply
I don’t think they do handle it in a decentralized manner. Would Dorsey and company do it differently than they did Twitter?
reply
155 sats \ 1 reply \ @freetx 23h
Dorsey funded BlueSky, which was originally meant to be a protocol. Dorsey wanted to integrate the protocol into Twitter so that he could tell the gov speech censures that he couldn't censure anyone because of the technical implementation.
The founders of BlueSky took Dorseys money then "pivoted" and launched it as a centralized Twitter competitor.
Simultaneous to this, Dorsey discovered nostr and deleted his BlueSky account.
reply
Yes, Dorsey did this with the protocol that he funded and provided to Bluesky, right? That means it is distinctly Dorsey’s responsibility for letting the monster loose and not controlling it. Shame on Dorsey! I wonder if he will fall for this trick again.
reply
143 sats \ 8 replies \ @ek 18 Dec
Dorsey is no longer a part of Bluesky
reply
155 sats \ 3 replies \ @kepford 23h
Twitter was a public company as well and I was an early user before it went public. Going public was a big factor in many of the issues. Dorsey has been very vocal about the mistakes. I feel like he gets a bum rap for it and is doing penance with his work with Nostr.
reply
169 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford 22h
I'm honestly not trying to white knight for Dorsey, he doesn't need my help. He's doing alright lol. Just get tired of this story getting missed. Much context is missing.
I've found over the years we to often focus on the men instead of the incentives. Incentive structures will almost always win and do what the incentives lead toward. Not to excuse man. But in my view man is weak and its just an easy whipping boy to point to the man instead of the system. You replace the man and you haven't solved the problem.
reply
In Dorsey’s case both the man and the system were badly mistaken. Considering he was the man to set up the systems in both Twitter and Bluesky, you can observe the results in both cases and draw your own conclusions on what he is doing.
reply
He didn’t get a bum rap, he is only trying to excuse himself from the consequences of his actions. They were his mistakes he’s is whining about, weren’t they? He did them himself. So, is he keeping Nostr censor free? I am not familiar with it.
reply
20 sats \ 2 replies \ @Shugard 17h
So he left Twitter, now Bluesky? When will he build on Nostr?
reply
I would be leery of what he will build on Nostr, seeing the results of his work at both of the others.
reply
16 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 9h
Well... Nostr is an open protocol which he seems to be a massive funder of. I mean, it's peanuts money wise. Remember he run Block and Cash.app as well.
reply
Did he quit in exasperation? He let the jinn out of the bottle, didn’t he? He left the censors in charge of it, right? It is still his doing.
reply
40 sats \ 1 reply \ @guts 18 Dec
If Bluesky users want the governance to consider ban a certain user because hate speech then it is not decentralized and censorship resistant.
reply
This is the same ol’ same ol’. They cannot seem to stay away from it. They leave X to start censoring each other. I see the humor in it, do they?
reply
17 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford 18 Dec
You mispelled Bluecry
reply
Hohohohoho….. I guess the blues are crying harder nowadays.
reply
27 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b OP 18 Dec
I regret putting this in ~nostr. I didn't realize she had bad things to say about it, but cool that's it's still mentioned.
The citations in this inspired me to A/B test some document printing/mailing services. I hate reading long-ish form (more than a page or two) on a computer. I'm always pulled away to something unless I'm harvesting all my will (which I have none of these days).
reply
Yeah, the author has some snippy remarks about ~nostr . I’m sure she did not want to offend, after all, isn’t that what Bluesky is all about?
reply