The future of Social Media

Please treat other members in a constructive manner and abide by our Forum Rules at all times.
  • Bankman-fried wants to fix social media with blockchain

    (article is behind paywall, but it may work for you)


    Just saw a very interesting interview on Bloomberg and a tech/finance billionaire reckons that the future of social media is for it to move onto the blockchain. All of it.


    What he is saying is basically there are curently separate platforms like Facebook and Twiiter which aren't interoperable with each other and he reckons this needs to change. He thinks all social messages should be placed on the blockchain to be accessible to everyone and you use your favourite social media platform to access the messages, but all the content is kept in the same place on the blockchain. Facebook and Twitter just become the interfaces to access that content, but they don't control the content, according to this guy.


    There is a regulatory dimension to this too. American regulators are clamping down on social media and if this were to happen, the tech companies like Facebook would lose control of the very thing that gives them so much control: people's data.


    Very interesting.


    Many forums, like this site, work like this already in many respects. Ok, the messages are not stored on the blockchain, but they are stored on databases and as I now use the cloud service of this site's software provider, WoltLab, it means that this site's data, along with other site's data who also use the WoltLab cloud service, are all kept in the same database.


    This idea takes it to the next level, I think. What do you reckon?

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • It's already been done a long time ago, take a look at Mastodon there are plenty of privacy friendly alternatives out there and some use P2P (blockchain) to connect so there's not one connection tracing back to you and is shared like torrent peers. The whole Internet may end up P2P one day and actually there are already networks in the making. Put the Internet back into the hands of the users. the problem is getting everyone to switch to these alternatives. The only reason folk use the likes of Facebook etc is because everyone, well mostly everyone uses them.

  • People can still use Facebook according to that guy, but it just becomes an interface only to access all the stuff which is centrally stored on the blockchain.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • I can't see the advantage to the companies themselves, though, although I was unable to read the link, which may have provided the answer to that question.


    If they can't gain access to the data, how do they make their money? Will these sites become subscription services?

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • I can't see that happening as companies like Facepoop are too tied in with governments and the legal systems so they can get away with paying next to no tax which is what keeps them sweet. Governments want an easy way to monitor and trace people which blockchain will make more difficult as data can then no longer be tied to one person. It's decentralised and bits come from here there and everywhere shared amongst the peers. It's basically P2P but they like to call it blockchain because of bitcoin making it a fashionable term.


    Governments don't like more security as it means less centralisation and accountability. I'm sure there are plenty of big boy corporations who wish to have more security for their users, I just can't see the governments allowing them plus they want easy links to peoples date themselves so they can sell it on and governments are one of their customers. Why do you think all the big corporations are allowed to use tax avoidance. They are told, legally obliged....to build back doors into their systems which is the main reason for the insecurity; why they are insecure and accounts /devices gets hacked.


    It's a catch 22 as you can't have high security and accountability with links to a device and /or user. It's similar to unencrypted traffic running through a proxy service which is extremely difficult to trace back to an individual and what the Tor browser is based on. Get a VPN so your traffic is also encrypted (note blockchain also user ciphers) then it's doubly as hard then, a VPN running through a proxy network is about as good as it gets as long as the proxy network has enough nodes to run through and juggle everything up.


    Blockchain & Role of P2P Network | Blockchain Council
    P2P architecture is suitable for various use cases and can be categorized into structured, unstructured, and hybrid peer-to-peer networks.
    www.blockchain-council.org

  • Nope, keep them all separated and go further, keep them away from each other altogether. It would be a mere matter of time before a ban on one platform becomes a ban from them all as they will be accessible from each other and presumably interacting with each other. This proposal is one step closer to a dystopian future of speech and thought control. Who would be in charge? Who would be the arbiter of truth and fact? Would all this be politically neutral? Or would it be a highly partisan universal platform supporting the US Democrats and radical left wing views in general and suppressing Conservative views as is the case now?


    I don't like this idea at all.

    Celebrate it, Anticipate it, Yesterday's faded, Nothing can change it, Life's what you make it

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!