@strypey for the analogy to hold, all mass transit systems worldwide should be privatised first
@strypey and that's precisely why I used the word "worldwide". Let me explain: cloud computing has been pushed on us because it is profitable at a global scale (you can pay Amazon for an AWS instance regardless of your location); to achieve the same level of global profitability, mass transit systems should be privatised worldwide, by a small group of companies, given the hyper local nature of mass transit.
@strypey centralized institutions will always suffer from "single failure point" problems, not to mention politics. I'd much prefer a decentralised replacement for both
@strypey my bad, I should have expressed myself better. To me "decentralised" means every single community gets to both control and enjoy the local implementation of a given system, regardless of how other communities organise themselves. Private cars are not decentralised in this sense, as private ownership prevents the community at large from benefitting from them. Mass transit, on the contrary, grants access to all
@strypey hey :)
> so it neatly fits your definition of 'decentralised', no?
- not really, as private ownership is not benefiting the community as a whole, but only those who actually own the cars (though car polling and car sharing schemes sometimes alleviate this problem)
@strypey so we have two parallel situations:
- private cars are decentralized but do not benefit the community
- public transport is centralized but benefits the community
An ideal scenario would be a decentralized transportation method that benefits the community, something we could achieve through cooperative ownership.
@strypey I get it, and I agree with you. I just wanted to point out that global private ownership is a key difference between cloud infrastructures and mass transit ones. besides this, I am all for mass transit
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!