Oh, not at all. What's driving the cost is the fundamental inefficiencies involved in a distributed system.
Centralized systems have efficiencies of scale that decentralized systems inherently lack, as the nodes must coordinate among themselves and duplicate their efforts and resources.
Well I guess if you're talking about taxpayer subsidization of these services that's one way to address the cost, but it's about paying the cost, not avoiding it.
And of course, the process of issuing those subsidies further politicizes the matter, arguably contributing to Balkanization.
@paul @HistoPol @fediversereport @fediversenews @david @Bluedepth @darren @juneussell
@volkris @The_Onliest @paul @HistoPol @fediversereport @fediversenews @david @Bluedepth @darren @juneussell
The problem with centralized is : We put all the assets in a single basket.
If a single bad actor manages to take control of the basket it now controls all the assets.
Centralization also takes away opportunities for evolving alternative and possibly better ways to do a thing.
100%. Centralization is not the solution. Back to the roots and how the internet was designed (maybe apart from ICANN ;)).
Maybe increased crowdfunding and for-pay, dedicated servers in a server farm with high(er)-speed access, if possible?
@volkris @The_Onliest @paul @fediversereport @fediversenews @david @Bluedepth @darren @juneussell
@HistoPol @antipode77 @The_Onliest @paul @fediversereport @fediversenews @david @Bluedepth @darren @juneussell
Bad news: dedicated servers are centralized 🙂
