I’ve mentioned it elsewhere but the way Lemmy was implemented doesn’t make sense from a user perspective.
The hosting should be decentralized, there should only be one website.
Server admins would choose if they agree to host NSFW content or not and would have the power to stop hosting content from certain communities but it should have no impact on the user’s side.
All content should be hosted on three servers at all times so if one shuts down there’s still a main and a backup server until they’ve finished uploading the content to a third server. All the same content wouldn’t necessarily be hosted on the same servers, what’s important would just be that there’s triple redundancy.
So yeah, make it like any other website, just decentralize the hosting itself… and that’s exactly what providers for major websites do as a matter of fact, so just do the same thing but using servers owned by a bunch of people instead of one company that has server farms in multiple locations.
If you just decentralize only the physical hosting part how would you handle responsibilities such as moderation and other key decisions? If there’s one central instance deciding on what to allow and what to block or on topics such as advertising, trackers etc., wouldn’t Lemmy end up with similar issues as Reddit and other traditional social media websites?
Moderation would work the same way it does right now, admins aren’t moderators.
An admin doesn’t want to host content from community X? They just block it from their server, it doesn’t matter, it’s hosted on two other servers and they’ll take care of sending the data to a third one.
Donations would be easy to automate via crypto, your public key would be part of the code, donation goes to the community and is split between the hosting servers.
I’ve mentioned it elsewhere but the way Lemmy was implemented doesn’t make sense from a user perspective.
The hosting should be decentralized, there should only be one website.
Server admins would choose if they agree to host NSFW content or not and would have the power to stop hosting content from certain communities but it should have no impact on the user’s side.
All content should be hosted on three servers at all times so if one shuts down there’s still a main and a backup server until they’ve finished uploading the content to a third server. All the same content wouldn’t necessarily be hosted on the same servers, what’s important would just be that there’s triple redundancy.
So yeah, make it like any other website, just decentralize the hosting itself… and that’s exactly what providers for major websites do as a matter of fact, so just do the same thing but using servers owned by a bunch of people instead of one company that has server farms in multiple locations.
If you just decentralize only the physical hosting part how would you handle responsibilities such as moderation and other key decisions? If there’s one central instance deciding on what to allow and what to block or on topics such as advertising, trackers etc., wouldn’t Lemmy end up with similar issues as Reddit and other traditional social media websites?
It doesn’t require a central authority.
Moderation would work the same way it does right now, admins aren’t moderators.
An admin doesn’t want to host content from community X? They just block it from their server, it doesn’t matter, it’s hosted on two other servers and they’ll take care of sending the data to a third one.
Donations would be easy to automate via crypto, your public key would be part of the code, donation goes to the community and is split between the hosting servers.