As @z428 has pointed out, decentralisation does not offer almost any advantages in this particular respect.
Individual instances are *more* likely to shut down or be subject to successful hacking, #DoS or data loss compared to the giants. What changes is that not *all* data would disappear (or be hacked) overnight but only parts of it.
I also note that technologies such as #Mastodon depend heavily on the efforts of a single developer.
@61 @z428 I can absolutely follow your rationale but I do disagree. Any decentralized, federated system is much more likely to have an import/export mechanism which lets you create backups or switch to a different instance. With the example of Google+: everything is lost for good. All the effort was spent for nothing when it comes to preventing loss of knowledge.
Ok, but in that case it is sufficient to advocate data export / import, regardless of centralisation.
For the record, I do support decentralisation but merely because I do not believe our ability to communicate and exchange information should be in the hands of a monopoly. This is not the 80s anymore.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!