Let's start a discussion about decentralized. EveRyOne caN hOsT hiS oWn ServEr. Do you mean the freaking internet in general? By definition, the internet is decentralized. "Decentralization has a protocol we all use to stay in sync". That existed already, it's called IP, TCP and UDP.. The decentralization protocols are on top of those making it only more limiting. Good, many nodes in sync. Yeah, replicating SQL servers exist for a long time.

People who 'invented' decentralized did just not realize how the internet works. Adding a network on top of a network ending up in a smaller network making it more centralized. "Decentralized" stuff has nothing to add. Just some word for replication protocol or smth.

I'm too sober to fall for this shit.

However I am behind two or three NATs which I do not control so my IP is worthless to host anything.

@cafecortado carrier grade nat? If so, did you try calling them? A friend of mine had the same issue and they just disabled it for him so now he has a proper ipv4

Who are you trying to catch with bait like this?

I mean technically correct but not societally correct because the only things people do on the internet is Facebook and common news websites and whatever else

it isn't even decentralized enough as the clubs that existed in college/uni. those were more diverse and filled with more colorful personalities and subcultures. everything on the Internet is one big monoculture for the most part because most people just go to big corpo social media websites which uplift specific content and opinions and hide others and also delete or shadowban stuff. this causes the culture to be fake and gay

decentralization has a discoverability problem which then was gamed by Google (which was actually funded by the CIA, again) and then Google made all these "centralized" businesses gain viewership. not to mention as a general silicon valley businesses focused on creating moats on purpose -- prevent interoperability, not promote it! if gov was any good they'd make moating illegal so no monopolies

@lorentz It's not bait. i'm just bad at making friends.

Decentrialized doesn't bring decenterialized to the table. It abstracts only to a lesser specific form of an already distributed system (the internetz). There's nothing great about it. Not A bIG coMpaNy oWniNg It. -> fine, enjoy the RPI-in-basement-speed for your services. Decentrialization == isolation.

@cafecortado yh, but that's probably also the case for a decentralized server. Decentralized doesn't change that per definition.

@cafecortado

Wait what?

Last time I checked none of the major ISPs in Spain have CG-NAT.

In any case, in Spain in rolling Orange and I have a regular IPv4 that hasn't changed in 7 years, without me even asking.

@retoor I'm not sending a message to a single computer that's received only by that computer and only if it's on. I'm publishing a message to a user or a group of users to be read whenever and however many times they wish, from any device where they authenticate themselves even in the future.

This is the bare minimum for a messaging system. Compared to this, even encrypted transport is optional.

@lorentz would've been same with some servers connected trough sql replication. Everything existed already. Decentralized is just a buzz word like server less.

Nah

Torrent everything. No server. p2p baby

@retoor serverless is some amazon bullcrap.

Take youtube. We dont need that google bitch, we can just exchange vidz like we did in the old days?

Remember the old day when metallica's singer became the biggest cunt in the universe by attacking napster?

What a twat.

I think that bitch made me hate metal forever. What's "metal" about sucking a corporate dick, idiot?

Metalheads have inferior mental abilities in my experience.

@retoor imagine if the web was based on gnutella instead of http.

@antigermanist gnutella was nice once, warez, ares, kazaa, lime wire frost wire (dc++?)