Hey, there is now an Anarchism public group on Nostr. Nostr is a very simple protocol which aims to become the ultimate decentralized social network, already fulfilling functionality of Twitter, Reddit (not very advanced tho), Twitch, Telegram and more. It is also uncensorable.
It is also more anarchist than the fediverse because your identity there is not bound to a server/domain which can be shut down or moderated at any time.
To join the group, you have to search for this ID: nevent1qqs05w7vklg8ewh4g7u8rafp3dsvtcw3j7v9j4v7n4k5fxxewaggjdspp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqpz4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezuerpw3sju6rpw4esz9rhwden5te0dehhxarj9ehhsarj9ejx2assy2425
On Android the app Amethyst is very good. With Nostr, the client handles everything. The servers are just dumb relays which don’t need to be trusted. That’s why there are a lot of different clients. Each one is implementing different aspects of the protocol and they are always evolving.
If you want to have a peek at the group you can also check here: https://coracle.social/chat/note1lgaued7s0ja023acw86jrzmqchsar9uct92ea8tdgjvdja6s3ymqa579ar
EDIT: There are a LOT of Nostr resources available and you can decide how deep you want to dive into it. A very basic and easy introduction is https://usenostr.org/ . The devs website nostr.com also does a good job of getting the point across. There is an awesome list which can point you to any Nostr related resources like which clients to use and also what other introductory guides are availabe: https://github.com/aljazceru/awesome-nostr
Popular clients including web, desktop and mobile are also described here: https://nostr.com/clients
Note that Nostr is very decentralized and that some clients implement features which other clients don’t (yet).
This video can also show you visually how the relationship between clients and relays works: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIccRIEr2gQ
Why do you think that a lack of structure, a design in which service nodes are no more than “dumb relays”, represents a higher refinement of anarchist objectives or values, compared to a federation of autonomous sites?
Individual freedom above all else. The individual is the smallest unit in the world I envision, not a group. Individuals can come together and cooperate, but they shoudn’t be bound to a group. Nostr’s architecture enables that while federated sites don’t. I don’t want to be chained to a “home instance”.
Please identify the Lemmy instance whose operators forced you to continue participation, so that operators of other instances may remove it from the federation, due to its abusive practices.
Anarchists do not advocate for “individual freedom above all else”, because they understand that freedom is a social value that characterizes social relationships, and therefore meaningless except as occurring within social systems.
There is no arbitrary expansion of individual freedom, or more precisely, there is no arbitrary expansion of the freedom for the members of one group, except by the contraction of the freedom of the members of another group.
I don’t like the concept of defederation. Every person registered on a defederated site then can no longer communicate with the rest, even if they themselves did nothing wrong. This site owner <-> user hirarchy is principally unjust. My home instance could shut down any day and then my account and possibly the content would be lost.
Anarchism is categorized into social anarchism and also individualist anarchism. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualist_anarchism I am more inclined to the latter.
In the digital world at least, freedom is potentially limitless, even without trampling on other peoples freedom.
Your objection is against your being a disempowered user of an instance completely outside your control, but such a condition is not requisite, in general, for participation in the Fediverse.
A Fediverse instance is simply a resource that is created, operated, and utilized socially.
An instance may be operated hierarchically or cooperatively, but an occurrence of the former case is not due to a flaw in design.
Rather, like any other such resource, its social management is entirely separate from its intrinsic nature.
However you frame the divisions, values and objectives have no relevance if they are predicated on conceptual errors.
Techno-utopian drivel is not worth my time to debunk.
You seem broadly to object to living in a society, which carries both benefits and burdens. Technology may help make life better for everyone, but it cannot free you from our responsibilities to one another, without which our lives would be both soon to end and meaningfulness to endure.
I like living in a society, I just don’t want to be dependent on anyone. In return, I don’t force other people to be dependent on me. As far as I’m concerned, everyone is happy.
As I suggested earlier through my mention of techno-utopianism, your views are too far removed from reality to be worth debunking.
In the context of social media, being able to revise or to remove one’s own content is a form of freedom, as is being protected against others’ abusive behavior, through norms and rules being enforced collaboratively within community.
No freedom may expand without limits, including through limiting other freedoms.
Being free depends on being in dialogue with those others in society on whose choices are dependent whichever freedoms you hold most precious.
All rules and norms will dissolve over time eventually. Which is good for my worldview and bad for yours. In the future women and men are equal, transgender will be normalized, “white” people will no longer exist,… Everyone will express themselves how they feel like, without being restricted by norms. It will be pure chaos, and it will be good.
Rules and norms are the basis of society.
You are immersed in a deep fantasy not worth further discussion.
Enjoy hanging with the crypto bros.