1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
|
---
layout: post
title: Achtung! Decentralize, decentralize, decentralize!
tags: [philosophy, privacy]
---
I can hardly believe it, but the media is finally putting Facebook's feet to the
fire! No longer is it just the weird paranoid kids shouting at everyone to stop
giving all of their information to these companies. We need to take this bull by
the horns and drive it in a productive direction, and for that reason, it's time
to talk about decentralization, federation, and open source.
*This article has been [translated into
Russian](http://getcolorings.com/ru-decentralize) by [Get
Colorings](http://getcolorings.com).*
It's important to remember that Facebook is not the only villain on this stage.
Did you know that Google keeps [a map of everywhere you've
been](https://www.google.com/maps/timeline?pb)? That Twitter is analyzing your
tweets just like Facebook does, and sells it to advertisers just like Facebook
does? Virtually all internet companies - Snapchat, Tinder, Uber & Lift, and
even more - are spying on you and selling it to advertisers. It's so lucrative
and easy to do this that it's become an *industry standard practice*.
The solution to the Facebook problem is not jumping ship to another centralized
commercial platform. They will be exactly the same. The commercial model for
internet services is inherently flawed. Companies like Facebook, publicly
traded, have a legal obligation to maximize profits for their shareholders.
Private companies with investors are similarly obligated. Nowhere in the
equation does it say that they're obligated to do *anything* for you - the only
role you serve is to be a vehicle for exploitation.
You need to find services whose incentives are aligned with yours. What asks do
you have from your social media platforms? It probably starts with basic things:
- I want to keep up with my family and friends
- I want my family and friends to be able to keep up with me
But if you're smart, you might have some deeper asks:
- I don't want my personal information sold to others
- I don't want to be manipulated into spending my money
We might even have some asks as a *society*, too:
- We don't want to be manipulated into hating our countrymen
- We don't want to have our people's opinions radicalized
Each company I've mentioned, and many more, may offer you some subset of these
promises. But *in every case*, they will have conditions:
- **We'll help you keep up with family and friends**, or at least the subset
of them that we think makes you more profitable.
- **We'll help your family and friends keep up with you**, so long as your posts
are engaging enough to keep them looking at our ads.
- **Your personal information won't be sold to others**, unless we can get away
with it.
- **You won't be manipulated into spending your money**, unless we can
manipulate you into spending it on us.
- **We won't manipulate you into hating your countrymen**, unless it makes you
spend more time using our platform to express your hatred.
- **We won't radicalize your opinions**, at least not the ones that don't get
you angry enough to spend more time looking at our ads.
I'm not just being cynical here. There is no promise that a company can make to
its users that outweighs the [fiduciary
duty](https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/fiduciary+duty) that
*obligates* them to maximize profits by any means. The only defense of this is
legislation and consumer choice. We must pass laws that defend users and we must
choose not to engage with companies that behave like this.
We must do both of these things, but for now I'm going to focus on the consumer
choice. We must throw our lot in with the alternative to these corporations -
decentralized, federated, open source platforms.
What do each of these terms mean?
*Decentralized* means that the platform is, well, not *centralized*. Rather
than the control being in the hands of one company (or a single interested
party, to generalize it a bit), control is in the hands of many independent
operators.
*Federated* refers to a means by which several service operators can
communicate with each other in standard ways. This approach prevents
platform lock-in. Email is a federated system - you can send an email from
your gmail account to your mother's old AOL account. Contrast this to Facebook,
where you can't follow your friend's Twitter account.
Finally, *open source*[^1] is a term used by the technology community to refer
to the free distribution of the secret sauce that makes our services tick. The
technology engineering community collectively works on these projects and freely
shares this work with everyone else.
The combination of all of these ideas in one piece of software is the golden
ticket to internet freedom. This is the approach to social networking taken most
famously by [Mastodon](http://joinmastodon.org/). Mastodon is a decentralized,
federated, and open source platform. The computing infrastructure the platform
runs on is operated by thousands of independent volunteers (decentralized),
which all communicate with each other and other software using standard
protocols (federated), and the [source
code](https://github.com/tootsuite/mastodon) is freely available for anyone to
use and improve (open source)[^2].
The incentives of the operators are aligned with the incentives of the users on
Mastodon. The operator of each instance is a human being who can be easily
reached to give feedback and thanks, rather than a billionaire egomaniac who buys
an entire neighborhood so no one can bother him. Because the costs of
maintaining this social network are distributed across thousands of operators,
each one has a very low cost of operation, which is usually easily covered by
donations from the users who they support. There are no investors to please.
Just the users.
Mastodon fills a Twitter-like niche. There are other platforms attempting to
fill other niches - [diaspora*](https://diasporafoundation.org/) is easily
compared to Facebook, for example.
[PeerTube](https://github.com/Chocobozzz/PeerTube) is under development to
fulfill a YouTube-like niche, too. These platforms need our support.
Commercial platforms don't respect you. You may have grown used to skimming over
ads and content you don't want to see on Facebook and other platforms. It's an
annoyance that you've internalized because, well, what else can you do? There
are no ads on Mastodon. It doesn't need them, and you deserve better than them.
<p style="text-align: center">---</p>
Remember, Facebook is not the only evil. It's time to discard proprietary
platforms like the manipulative trash they are. Take the anger you've felt at
Facebook these past couple of weeks and use it to embrace decentralization,
federation, and open source.
I know it seems a monumental task to untangle your life from these companies,
but you don't have to do it all at once. If this article moved you, make a todo
list right now. List each way in which you're tied to some platform - you use
Facebook to talk to your friends, or use gmail for your email address, your
contacts are stored on Google, you use Facebook's calendar for social events,
you have a Twitter account you haven't moved... then take on each task one at a
time. Take as much time as you need. As you research these options, if you find
the open options lacking, let the people involved know what your needs are. If
there's no open option at all, please [email me](mailto:sir@cmpwn.com) about it.
We can do this. We can be free.
[^1]: There is some debate about the use of the term "open source" as opposed to another term, "free software". There is a time and a place for this discussion, but it's not here, and our message weakens if we expose the general public to our bickering.
[^2]: There are actually several competing and compatible softwares that federate with the same social network Mastodon uses. This is very similar to how several different email providers are compatible with each other and compete to innovate together.
|
