A Guide to Decentralized Social Networks

Decentralized social networks, also known as federated networks, are emerging following distrust in centralized in centralized social media platforms. Many users were dissatisfied with how major social media platforms have handled misinformation, free speech, privacy & political neutrality.

How do decentralized social networks work?

In contrast to centralized servers owned by businesses, decentralized social networks operate on privately run servers. A good example is Mastodon. Unlike Twitter, it is powered by open-source software. A similar example is Steem, which uses social blockchain technology. With the help of blockchain technology, data can be stored anywhere. Transparency is enhanced, as anyone on the network can view the data almost in real-time.

Users have more control over decentralized social networks. You can control how your social network operates and what its users can say by setting it up yourself. By establishing the terms of acceptable behavior for the site, the founder of a federated social network instead of a corporation can monitor the content.

The Fediverse

The fediverse refers to a collection of interconnected servers used for social networking, blogging, and other online activities. A federated network that is hosted independently can communicate with other networks in the fediverse.

This distinction distinguishes decentralized social networks from mainstream social media platforms like Twitter and Meta (formerly Facebook), which are distinguished by their centralization. Users on Twitter, for example, can only send and receive messages to other Twitter users (e.g., Twitter users cannot send messages to Facebook accounts since there is no cross-platform alignment). Federated networks, on the other hand, facilitate interaction with one another across multiple networks.

A good illustration of how federated social networks work is email. Take Google and Yahoo, for example. For its users, each organization establishes email restrictions. Yahoo users are not subject to any restrictions imposed by Google. Users of Google, on the other hand, can send and receive emails from Yahoo users and vice versa. Federated networks function similarly.

The benefits and drawbacks of decentralized networks

Connectivity, community building, and knowledge sharing are all facilitated by social media. Consumers can use social media to advertise their businesses, push social and political change, raise awareness about vital topics, and generate donations for people in need. Cyberbullying, political misinformation and even criminal conduct are examples of the dark side of social media. Due to the lack of moderation in decentralized social networks, both positive and negative effects become more severe.

Censorship resistance, user control, and free speech

Major social media networks are controlled by corporate entities, and the rules of involvement are defined by a small group of persons within these corporations. Users have expressed concerns about free speech and censorship as a result of this. Individuals who break Facebook's terms of service, for example, are likely to have their accounts suspended. While banning violent, hateful, and harmful messaging helps safeguard social media users from malicious online activities, some argue that the restrictions violate free speech principles.

Users have more power over a decentralized social network. Federated networks, unlike centralized social networking systems, promote independence without a central authority. Censorship resistance, personal data ownership, and increased control over user-generated material are all advantages. Users, in other words, refuse to be censored and insist on having the last say over their content. This means that no one else, including a corporation or a website administrator, can change content submitted by users. No one has the authority to remove user-generated content.

In a federated network, no single group has authority over the rules of other groups. Anyone on Mastodon, for example, can run their own social media site without the need for a central authority, which means they (and other users) can publish whatever they want without fear of it being taken down. One disadvantage of this system is that hate organizations can create their own social media platforms. Individuals can ban these groups from using the network, but they can't stop them from using it.

Privacy, personal information, and security

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) was established in Europe in response to user concerns regarding personal data control. Users are referred to as "data controllers" in the regulation. "Data processors" are the term for social media corporations. Users own their own data, according to the GDPR definition of data controller. Companies, at least those situated in Europe, are required by law to provide users more control over their personal data. Companies are fined if they do not adhere to GDPR laws.

Another solution to data privacy and security has been provided by decentralized social networks. Users can create accounts on federated social networks without needing to link them to real-world identities such as email addresses or phone numbers. Additionally, rather than relying on a single company to protect user data, these networks frequently use public-key cryptography for account security.

While this has certain benefits in terms of data security, it also has some drawbacks. For example, due to a lack of money, bootstrapped federated social networks may shut down, leading users to lose their data and connections. Because federated networks do not store archives of personal data on servers, users have no easy means to reconnect with others on the network in this case. In terms of privacy, these platforms do not always encrypt data, which means that administrators may be able to see private messages.

Neutrality in the economy

For many people who use decentralized social networks, economic neutrality is a must-have ideal: they want to be free of intrusive advertising and the risk it brings to their privacy. To stay afloat, federated networks are looking for new ways to make money. To keep operations operating, they frequently employ a kind of digital currency such as Bitcoin. Steem, for example, rewards users for creating or curating interesting content, incentivizing content creators to put quality first. Steem is funded by investors who believe the platform will appreciate in value over time and eventually become lucrative.