@libertyoftheforest technologically certainly possible, yet the challenge comes to sustainably build and evolve it such that it remains commons-based. An interesting area, where I focus now as former fedi commons janitor :)
@marcel @smallcircles @libertyoftheforest I'd like to mark data longevity explicitly, even if it can be folded into maintenance.
Yes, you can run quite a few services on a tiny devices now. But one glitch and it's all gone forever.
Centralization does not solve it by itself, but through pooling of resources. It is cheaper to have redundancy at scale - when the effort went into your backup solution and ops is amortized per user.
In a way we have to replicate this aspect but in a distributed fashion. Not only your tiny device should serve your community, but your neighbors too: "I host your backups and you host mine".
#GNUnet has a good story here for privacy and distribution, but they got bogged down on the protocol level.
@marcel @smallcircles @libertyoftheforest With a few more levels of "we host your backups and you host ours", slicing, mixing, and anonymous scattering it is possible to achieve the level of resiliency above and beyond those of centralized silos.
However, this gets into political territory if we really into privacy as those would require extreme levels of anonymous mixing and you'd almost guaranteed to host some **nasty** stuff without a way to kick it out or even detect.
So, p2p is in the bind here: either you're vulnerable to metadata dragnets and association tracking or inadvertently trade resources with someone you wouldn't like (if you had the option to know).
