@Merovius I disagree with the basic premise that social networks are a field where purely technical considerations are a major factor in what solution is better. The goal isn't just to build a robust network mechanism, but to connect people in a beneficial way.

@abgd Ahm. But without technology, social networks do not exist and there are no users. Technological considerations are hugely important; if the site is slow or down, timelines are out of order, you can't actually talk to 98% of the network, there is friction in obvious workflows because of the SOP… your social network is useless. It's *because* people are the central consideration, that you need to take technical issues into account.

@abgd When I say "Centralization has technical advantages", I mean "making a compelling and useful product that connects people in a meaningful way is infinitely more difficult, if not impossible, with a federated system". It has advantages to achieve what should be the ultimate goal.

@Merovius I didn't say you can ignore technology, that would be absurd. I worded myself very carefully: *purely* technological considerations aren't a major factor in judging solutions.
Anyway, obviously centralization is an easier solution for social networks, but it's become pretty clear it has massive drawbacks and even raises human rights issues...

@abgd Well, in the same vein, I worded myself carefully when I said "Obligatory", "inherently" and "can't just be ignored" ;) You also said it's not "a major factor"; and I strongly disagree with that, obviously. It's a very major factor; and one that is currently largely ignored by people hyping mastodon. Your original toot is an example of that; saying that being "superior" to twitter is as simple as having a 140 character limit.