Somehow, I feel like the federated network is still centralized, because there is still censorship; it's just distributed across more servers.
I mean, it definitely gives users more rights to free speech, and I'm not worried about privacy issues. However, the removal of content and the banning of accounts are things that are diminishing my passion for sharing my thoughts publicly(on reddit).
I just dont want this happened on here but I am seeing some...
I think "polycentric" is a better term than "decentralized."
Every instance is a center, and is vulnerable to failure and corruption like any service provider. But at least we have a choice of instances, and there isn't a single point of failure for the whole network.
I mean, they're practically interchangeable words. They mean fairly the same thing. Polycentric is decentralized. You can use that word if it works for you, but decentralized is still correct.
Then what would you call a network where specific data isn't tied to specific nodes and lost when the node goes down?
You are describing a decentralized system. But you aren't describing a required function of decentralization.
I think that might be a little too macro for newcomers to understand.
macro?
I don't think you quite understand what 'decentralized' means. Decentralization means there's no central server, implying no data collection, no restrictions or moderation, and no banning.
Furthermore, it won't corrupt when a single node breaks down. This is because a decentralized network is essentially built by all users within the network. Whenever one user quits or a node breaks down, there are always other nodes/users available to maintain the network. That's the essence of a decentralized network.
That is absolutely incorrect. All of those things can and do exist but it is dependent on each instance. There isn’t a single entity controlling those things, each fediverse instance decides for themselves. One instance could collect everything you do, restrict what you post, moderate what users post and comment, and ban users as they please.
Decentralisation doesn’t mean “no rules”
I just said that lemmy is not a decentralized network...
But it literally is.
Why do you think so ?
Because it's polycentric. Each instance is a center. When an instance goes down, it takes all its users and data with it.
I know people around here aren't fond of cryptocurrency, but bitcoin is what I'd consider a truly decentralized system. Nothing is lost to the network when a bitcoin node goes down. As long as you have your private key, you can spend from any node, and you don't even need a node to receive.
I believe it's helpful to distinguish between the two types of systems.
Thanks for explaining 😊
Thanks for asking. :) Have a good one.
A federated network is inherently decentralized, because the network can continue to operate in a diminished state after a node goes dark. Your local government and electric grid are decentralized.
I think you're mixing up "Decentralized" with "Distributed." A distributed network operates at full capacity as long as at least one node has (the majority of) the network's content.
gitandtorrentare distributed.Well, as long as a distinction is made. I appreciate the information. I still feel that "decentralized" should be replaced with "polycentric," but I'll accept that "decentralized" is the standard term for a system with multiple centers.
Lmao, I missed the ‘term’ word, I thought you said is better than decentralized, sry bro