- Protocols are languages. You don’t have to ask for permission to speak a language. Best explanations I have found was this blog post.
-
Free Speech platforms cannot exist. Only Free Speech protocols can exist. ⤴️
-
The difference is as subtle as it is important: when using a protocol, you’re not a user in the traditional sense. You are a speaker. You speak the same language as other people, and if someone else can hear and understand you, there is a connection. There is no facilitator in between. The language itself is the facilitator. Languages are protocols and protocols are languages. They don’t have users; they have speakers. ⤴️
-
- Space is that which is not centrally controlled. Platforms are centrally controlled islands within space.
- Protocols are a prerequisite for coordination. Platforms consist of centrally controlled protocols.
- Protocols can be in the background (for system-to-system communication). You don’t experience SMTP, HTTPS, SSH, UDP, TCP, IP directly (or minimally, when configuring your clients that they need to interact with that layer).
- The more I care about something, the less I tolerate the possibility of changing incentives of someone with power over the things supply chain. I don’t care about how computers talk to each other, but I intensely care about the experience I have with Email (SMTP) or the Web (HTTPS).
- The problem is, that the type of protocols do ultimately matter, because they ultimately decide if there can be competition around clients and thus my experience.
- By focusing on crafting protocols that by definition do not make up the experience of users, we give freedom to individuals to choose how they want to interact with the essence that is transmitted via the protocols. This stands in contrast with platforms, that aim to control the complete experience someone has with it (because it gives more power to the platform owners). The ability to choose an interface allows you to decide which experiences you make.