Wouldn’t it be possible to make those incentives without putting up barriers?
Idk, maybe? I’m just listing one of the reasons they do so. I’m honestly in no position to say what would be better to do since I do not live in or have any connection to China.
Like let’s say for instance, trying to make a better product?
It’s not good enough to just make another, better product and call it a day. If it were that easy, the Fediverse would be bigger than the proprietary counterparts, and that’s not the case. The Web is dominated and controlled by Western software. To “build a better product” gives you, at best, hope that your product may succeed against Western software and that you’ll be able to have digital sovereignty. Why hope when there are more concrete ways of gaining that sovereignty?
With this reasoning, I can understand why China does what it does, but I won’t comment on if it’s their best course of action because, again, it’s not my place.
individual freedom of choice
Other countries don’t necessarily care about a Western conception of individual freedom. This goes for many countries, not just China.
True…but also I think the tendency is to grow as the others did, it’s just that we are at an early stage. There is no reason to believe this won’t be the standard one day. So our perspective right now is that this is a niche but there was also a time that today’s main players were.
I agree with you that one day the Fediverse may be standard, but why subject ourselves to “may” if we have the ability to be for sure that our software is standard? I also agree that it would take a long time, and that’s a key point. When it comes to securing digital sovereignty, I don’t think a country can afford to wait, lest it ends up losing the best opportunity to seize that sovereignty.
It’s not your place to think critically and give your opinion? Isn’t this a discussion to do that?
I’ll give my opinion on why they may have decided to pursue the avenue they did with the Great Firewall and how effective it’s been for them, but I won’t say whether or not it’s the best course of action or if they could’ve done X thing instead because there’s no way I could know. I’ll have to trust that the well-studied Marxists in the CPC made the best decision they thought possible.
Idk, maybe? I’m just listing one of the reasons they do so. I’m honestly in no position to say what would be better to do since I do not live in or have any connection to China.
It’s not good enough to just make another, better product and call it a day. If it were that easy, the Fediverse would be bigger than the proprietary counterparts, and that’s not the case. The Web is dominated and controlled by Western software. To “build a better product” gives you, at best, hope that your product may succeed against Western software and that you’ll be able to have digital sovereignty. Why hope when there are more concrete ways of gaining that sovereignty?
With this reasoning, I can understand why China does what it does, but I won’t comment on if it’s their best course of action because, again, it’s not my place.
Other countries don’t necessarily care about a Western conception of individual freedom. This goes for many countries, not just China.
deleted by creator
I agree with you that one day the Fediverse may be standard, but why subject ourselves to “may” if we have the ability to be for sure that our software is standard? I also agree that it would take a long time, and that’s a key point. When it comes to securing digital sovereignty, I don’t think a country can afford to wait, lest it ends up losing the best opportunity to seize that sovereignty.
I’ll give my opinion on why they may have decided to pursue the avenue they did with the Great Firewall and how effective it’s been for them, but I won’t say whether or not it’s the best course of action or if they could’ve done X thing instead because there’s no way I could know. I’ll have to trust that the well-studied Marxists in the CPC made the best decision they thought possible.