I would simply put in evidence that the " great YouTube " ban on its own created dozens of competitors which would have never been viable other wise.
yet those alternatives are still centralized services the employ the client-server model, not p2p.
They are still under central control, which is why they are allowed to continue existing.
Most of them use cloudflare, or other types of spyware dragnets, further centralizing control and information flow.
The trick is getting us, the plebians, to believe that something like the "youtube ban" was unintenteded and not part of their plan.
P2P is you coming on the show and us having this conversation simulcast on multiple platforms for all to hear, P2P is me welding my neighbors tractor shaking his hand. You see how the language has been inverted? the actual meanings of the words inverted?
No it's not. p2p within the context of computer network is a well defined term which has existed for decades. I get your point, but the platforms you speak of are the centralization point. You are distributing your message on multiple platofrms, but each of those platforms is centrlaized. Each website has to register legal information for the site. THe infrastructure is tied to a legal person, etc. etc.
Moreso than that, all information ends up flowing through one of a set of centralized services. Meaning, all that information can be aggregated into one place and mined into infinity. Which is already what is happening
(post is archived)