> I'm sorry, but why do you think Google and AWS are the best we can do?
Please don't set up a straw man. You seem to be claiming that I'm arguing in favor of complete centralization. I'm not.
Google and AWS both need competitors.
That also doesn't mean that we as a society haven't benefitted monumentally from Google and AWS existing.
Centralization has vast benefits. We should not discount those simply because it also makes a juicy target for evildoers. It's throwing the baby out with the bathwater to say "this is the fault of centralization".
Your approach works and benefits people even if we as an industry continue to primarily build centralized services (and we will, because it is tremendously more cost-effective). I encourage you to pursue it in parallel.
I think we're saying the same thing. As I mentioned, I am NOT saying centralization doesn't have benefits -- I even mentioned some major ones, including having enough money to do awesome R&D and move humanity forward. What I am saying is that open source foundations need to step up their game, and build servers that automatically talk to each other, are easy to install, maintain, and are user friendly. Kind of like the new WebRTC P2P client/servers.
Please don't set up a straw man. You seem to be claiming that I'm arguing in favor of complete centralization. I'm not.
Google and AWS both need competitors.
That also doesn't mean that we as a society haven't benefitted monumentally from Google and AWS existing.
Centralization has vast benefits. We should not discount those simply because it also makes a juicy target for evildoers. It's throwing the baby out with the bathwater to say "this is the fault of centralization".
Your approach works and benefits people even if we as an industry continue to primarily build centralized services (and we will, because it is tremendously more cost-effective). I encourage you to pursue it in parallel.