How is RSS not decentralized? RSS is typically published alongside the content it is syndicating. There is no central RSS publisher. What central RSS reader there was decided to lay down and die, so there's no centralization there either.
I still don't understand. RSS may be sourced from a single server, but it is, like I said, also generally being run from the same entity that is sourcing the content going into the RSS feed. Some sort of additional "decentralization" would be bad.
RSS and the content it is syndicating being connected is a good thing overall; AIUI Mastadon ultimately advertises very similar types of control over data in terms of random entities not schlepping whatever data they like around under whatever pretenses they like. (RSS of course has no fine-grain controls, partially by design, partially because no other design was possible at the time.)
Let me put it this way: Being specific, how is my RSS feed at http://jerf.org/iri/rss.xml particularly "centralized"? I mean, yes, I'm the one serving it, but that's what I want, just like my email comes in to a server under my control by my choice. There's no central service, no central registry I had to register that with, no central consumer, no central authority to tell me they won't carry it or that it's going to censor me.
>> 'I still don't understand. RSS may be sourced from a single server, but it is, like I said, also generally being run from the same entity that is sourcing the content going into the RSS feed. Some sort of additional "decentralization" would be bad.'
Some of these hot new podcast startups are trying to do exactly this. Ben Thompson of Stratechery/Exponent talks about this often: he refuses to add his podcast to Google or Spotify because they control the relationship between audience and podcaster. Apple, for example, only provides discovery for podcast RSS feeds and hasn't tried to take control (yet).
The gmail problem refers to the centralization of email by large central providers like gmail. In theory email is a protocol that anyone you can setup on your own server, but in practice any email you send from there cant be read by anyone, because it will automatically be marked as spam by central providers like gmail/yahoo/outlook (what 99% of email users use).
Protocols like ActivityPub and email are highly susceptible to this, whereas blockchain based protocols like Bitcoin are immune to this problem.
+1. I just watched Eric Weinstein on Lex Fridman's podcast. He is angry about how students have been emasculated by the establishment. That the death of Aaron Schwartz was a tragedy and the students should 'rise up and take back' MIT. Yet he himself has a net worth over 100mill and is doing nothing about it.He promises betterment through revolution like Batista and Castro, yet he himself is busy amassing wealth. Why does he think youth will waste itself on anything else except the pursuit of the dream that made him successful? Internet has just become another tool for control because that's just what humans do - make tools out of anything including their fellow humans.
Precisely. Courage requires actual conquering of fear, which doubtlessly involves confrontation with the status quo rather than a few microphone jibber jabbers. Who in the Western World has a contempt for convenience?
Those seem unrelated to the parent's point. Weinstein is co-opting the death of Aaron Schwartz to push his own far-right ideology. The target of his form of `rise up and take back` is neither "corporate shenanigans" nor "capitalist greed", but those who challenge it from the center and the left.
He's clearly very popular with the Breitbart crowd, and about as anti-establishment as any billionaire politician with the backing of a media arm and an attitude of suing everyone who challenges his views. School of Thiel and all.
Weinstein isn't far right. You have no idea what far right is if you think he is. He is centre-right maybe centre. His brother and his sister-in-law are both lefties. There is nothing far right about Weinstein or his family.
> He's clearly very popular with the Breitbart crowd, and about as anti-establishment as any billionaire politician with the backing of a media arm and an attitude of suing everyone who challenges his views. School of Thiel and all.
Actually I do talk to the people you are talking about, and again most of them aren't far right. The actual far-right don't like Weinstein or his brother (they tend to not like Jewish people on the far right).
Weinstein acts right but talks left. He hoards his hundred millions and goads students to take back MIT. He gives lip service to Aaron Schwartz without doing anything to reduce the digital divide. He is an establishment hypocrite. He is a whiner. (weiner?)
This is quite a dishonest attempt at rewriting history with no respect for the truth. You can pretend to see your gaslighting remark as truth, but I've looked into every one of your claims about these people and I cannot come close to the same conclusion as you. I do not, however, call his brother far-right. Perhaps you could be excused for believing someone isn't far right when the overton window among english-speaking countries has narrowed so far to the right of center.
(The report itself doesn't do a particular good job either as they use some dubious sources and I don't agree with half of it, but their definitions of the groups are close enough).
I've listened to a lot of Weinstein on various shows he has appeared as a guest on and I haven't heard anything that can be considered far right. One of the first times I seen Weinstein was when he appeared on Dave Rubin who is a gay liberal/libertarian (the last time I watched his show it seemed to change every other week) that lives in California.
> Perhaps you could be excused for believing someone isn't far right when the overton window among english-speaking countries has narrowed so far to the right of center.
This is a complete nonsense. The Anglo-sphere for the most part is pretty much centre, centre-left. Many conservatives and paleo-conservatives complain their conservative parties aren't really conservative (which isn't far-right either btw).
The term far-right in itself is a poor description. A better term is a "reactionary right". But that is a whole other discussion between the "reactionary right" and the "traditional right". Right and Left are really poor descriptions of political positions and that is why many tests online now are multi-dimensional.
Research shows that containers are really bad for security: the majority of containers on docker hub has vulnerabilities with CVEs out and never received updates.
Shared libraries, at least, allow more automated updates, but containers are still a problem.
Unfortunately nothing in such protocols prevents the gmail problem.