to use the former terms in that a central authority has control over all nodes
In my experience, most people consider "decentralized" to be fully-distributed. They do not see it as a client-server model. Most decentralized technologies pushed today are basically client-server, where the user-run servers are basically just middleware clients between the client and the main-server.
Though, it's a moot point considering majority of online users are completely ignorant of the infrastructure they're currently using--let alone alternative comm paradigms.
> to use the former terms in that a central authority has control over all nodes
In my experience, most people consider "decentralized" to be fully-distributed. They do not see it as a client-server model. Most decentralized technologies pushed today are basically client-server, where the user-run servers are basically just middleware clients between the client and the main-server.
Though, it's a moot point considering majority of online users are completely ignorant of the infrastructure they're currently using--let alone alternative comm paradigms.
Yes.
Things like Pleroma are considered decentralized because it is multiple servers under multiple persons. So I guess it’s all how you want to consider it.
Yes.
Things like Pleroma are considered decentralized because it is multiple servers under multiple persons. So I guess it’s all how you want to consider it.
(post is archived)