* Adrien Bourmault <n...@a-lec.org> [2021-08-21 22:10]: > This is a very strange definition of a centralized network! In > truth, a centralized network is defined as a network that is > dependent on a single governing and/or centrally controlled entity.
My wish was to say rather "centralized social networks" not just "centralized networks". There is difference. There is nothing inherently wrong with the terminology in its literal meaning itself. For example, my social network in my house is very centralized, as we are to speak from OUR central house with each other. Nobody is to interfer there. Businesses have centralized social network of people where they communicate about specific subjects. Private chat installed on server for specific purposes is automatically centralized, not inherently bad as it is for specific group of people. It starts becoming harmful when it becomes a public forum where people become product for the company and where their participation in network is possible only through the central entity. Emotions and relations with family and friends become a product, and that harms humanity. Surveillance is always part of it. Computer need not know the messages but it can construct a graph or relationship knowledge of who is with whom doing probably what, that is how Whatsapp works selling business services. > Centralization has nothing to do with the possibility or not to use > the command line, or to use an unofficial application: it is > eventually always the same server that is contacted and the same > entity that controls everything. I agree. Though downloading videos is not "social" activity, but participating in chat on YouTube is centralized as it is centralized social network, one can do that only with Youtube account. I prefer NOT to have the software piece in free software distribution that serves only the vendor and vendor's lock-in and is not usable for nothing else. Examples: ━━━━━━━━━ - Mastodon applications can access various networks, ALRIGHT, everybody can host Mastodon instances; - NewPipe is for downloading videos, ALRIGHT, there is no username or lock-in - Email, ALRIGHT, everybody can host Mastodon instances; - Telegram, NOT ALRIGHT, as I cannot have my own Telegram server, it was designed to lock-in users; software is free but there is no possibility to modify it to work with my own server. -- Jean Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns: https://www.fsf.org/campaigns In support of Richard M. Stallman https://stallmansupport.org/
