Diaspora is nice yup, but more like a distributed tumblr or twitter on steroids.
Friendica is more like a social network, tons of features, also can integrate with facebook and lots of other networks, but its UI is a bit confusing, despite (or because of) lots of themes available.
Topic: Has anyone considered a decentralized social network? (Read 889 times)
Yep, Diaspora is cool.
Yeah its about time.
Now that people call programs "apps" and think they are cool to download and run instead of doing everything in a browser, it could take off.
Also take a look at Diaspora.
Now that people call programs "apps" and think they are cool to download and run instead of doing everything in a browser, it could take off.
Also take a look at Diaspora.
I don't think very many people need that much security when sending messages
The idea isn't about security. It's a method of creating a facebook alternative which isn't going to grow an incentive to be full of ads and tracking once the userbase moves.
Suppose I need send secure messages in a easy straighforward way. A forum just to schedule meetings and some private info, for example.
Is there any --very easy-- usable non instant message project out there?
Really interesting, I look forward to seeing how that and other sites develop.
I don't think very many people need that much security when sending messages
The idea isn't about security. It's a method of creating a facebook alternative which isn't going to grow an incentive to be full of ads and tracking once the userbase moves.
A lot of these sites already exist. You could even do that with this site, all you'd have to do is add a few features. There's not really any incentive or else it'd already be created, I don't think very many people need that much security when sending messages, and the people that do usually aren't interested in that type of thing.
One of the problems with creating an alternative to facebook, without ads and tracking, is that even if you do manage to get the market to move then it creates a huge incentive to introduce ads and tracking, just as facebook did after it gained the market from myspace.
What if there was a peer-to-peer social network instead? Public messages are submitted to it signed with my private key, restricted messages and events are signed with the private keys of the receivers too. Websites which access this stuff for you would be for ease of use, reflecting whats on the network rather than controlling it directly, so any website which imposes too high a cost (such as ads or snoping) will be outed by competition. Competition in websites and clients would also drive innovations in usability, and towards whoever is willing to host data for the minimum cost.
You might guess from my vague wording that I do not have any technical expertise and I have not thought about it much further, that's why I'm asking you guys.
What if there was a peer-to-peer social network instead? Public messages are submitted to it signed with my private key, restricted messages and events are signed with the private keys of the receivers too. Websites which access this stuff for you would be for ease of use, reflecting whats on the network rather than controlling it directly, so any website which imposes too high a cost (such as ads or snoping) will be outed by competition. Competition in websites and clients would also drive innovations in usability, and towards whoever is willing to host data for the minimum cost.
You might guess from my vague wording that I do not have any technical expertise and I have not thought about it much further, that's why I'm asking you guys.
Jump to: