Re:Ask HN: What would a Facebook that isn't evil look like?
by v_london on Sunday July 25, 2021 @04:48AM
(#27947742)
> Entire social graph, data store, and all relationships and actions are public-ledgered, fully transparent, and available for download, archiving, and re-homing.
This sounds like a privacy disaster. I wouldn't want data mining companies to find out about who I'm connected to. In my opinion, connections should be private to anyone but yourself (which is probably going to be hard to perform in a distributed manner).
Re:Ask HN: What would a Facebook that isn't evil look like?
by forgotmypw17 on Sunday July 25, 2021 @06:49AM
(#27948213)
You can make all those things private only to the extent that you trust each individual participant. The larger the group, the more likely a leak can happen. The other defense is limiting what you share with the network, and selectively encrypt.
There's a lot of benefit to be gained from sharing the social graph (or at least statistics based on it, which, however, can sometimes be reversed unexpectedly)
At the moment, we have the exact opposite of the situation you're asking for--anyone who's got a database and 10 bucks can see everything, while those for whom the data is the most relevant and potentially beneficial have very limited access... so even full transparency is an improvement, IMO.
User accounts are owned and controlled by the users by means of a private key. (And thus the same identity or multiple linked identities can work across different "facebooks")
Entire social graph, data store, and all relationships and actions are public-ledgered, fully transparent, and available for download, archiving, and re-homing.
Moderation is also fully transparent, performed by volunteers who are part of the community on a rotating basis, and heavily aided by bayesian filtering.
Hardware and software maintenance costs are covered by voluntary payments and effort investment.
Is there anything I missed?