instagram is a service which, due to what we in the industry call "complete bullshit", requires an application also called "instagram" to use it
but every single thing is like that so we just say "instagram is an app" and i can't stand it
even with completely nonstandard interfaces free software is necessary, if not sufficient, for fixing this
you could have many competing android photo sharing apps implementing many APIs each. real user choice
free software doesn't fix those apps being bad - we need other things for that - but it at least makes it possible for them to have other motives than "extract money from users' wallets"
the uh. slightly less wholesome conclusion here is that we irretrievably lost some time around 2012 and what we have now is just the scraps the corps are okay with throwing to us
and the FSF and GNU are basically just a distraction. the stallman thing doesn't matter, none of it matters, because we'll never have meaningfully free computing in the hands of the many
@tindall idk about that. i think that right now, we don't have meaningfully free computing in the hands of the many because we don't really have meaningful computing at all in the hands of everyone.
personal computers are one of those things, i think, that's going to be a battleground of technical development for a long time yet to come just because of the range of things they enable.
and, well, i think peer-to-peer networking is going to be the next big thing. we just haven't gotten to mass adoption yet, but i'm eyeing blockchain as one of the things that will get the idea enough popular acceptance to really spark the general imagination. there is quite a lot there that could be repurposed.
@KitRedgrave fair enough, i do remember reading that when this stuff first started being A Thing
but i've yet to see any other use for blockchain that wasn't first and foremost someone looking for a use for blockchain rather than anything it clearly did better than the existing alternative
for data verification i literally cannot imagine a situation where a central arbitrator (+ succession plan if that arbitrator is compromised) would not be more efficient overrall
@KitRedgrave practically, the only situations i can imagine where there's so little trust among 3+ parties that they can't ever agree on any third party to arbitrate mere data verification (not any actual decision, just making sure everyone's copy of the data is the same), those parties aren't exactly inclined to share anything in good faith with any of the others
@carcinopithecus you would be surprised how many decentralized autonomous organizations there are on these platforms, that have proposals and verified votes.
low trust on the infrastructure level and multiple verifications enables you to trust that anything that stands up to that scrutiny is legit, because it would be increasingly harder to cheat.
@KitRedgrave no exaggeration: the notion of a group of equals voting on something tjey had to work together on had completely slipped my mind
been spending way too much time in an environment where every decision is finally decided by either deference to authority or threat of reprisal
@carcinopithecus yeah, that is the thing about blockchain that's really cool. you can encode things like votes, and they're permanent, and if there are things on the blockchain that are tied to that proposal, then the transaction specified in that proposal happens without anyone having to follow up.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!