People don't seem to get this was a genuine question. What is a network without people using it? Anyone here on reticulum?
The internet may be ripe for disruption, as it has been domesticated for corporate use. It is no longer ours. Browsers have become an operating system unto themselves. Something much simpler would work also. Corporate bloat is continuing to pile up, while markdown evolves to do everything we want.
People do use it but it's definitely a small community. It has the NomadNet Page protocol which is basically small no client side script webpages (forms and links only) in a fairly bandwidth efficient form.
> Anyone here on reticulum?
Is that even the right question?
I only read the intro message but the framing I arrived/guessed at was:
"open, distributed alternative to tailscale"
So I think my first usecase would be to use this instead of tailscale to connect to my Pi?
[Gnomic comments go over people's heads (I'm guilty of writing these too). Gotta think in UX terms - write to make your audience's lives easier, not harder.]
You're right, and I think a lot of these projects hit the same problem: "what can this offer me that centralized platforms can't?"
Take the Gemini protocol: if someone invents a "Gemini killer app" it can be replicated over the web because the web's features are a superset of Gemini's features. Medium is the centralized equivalent of traditional blogging. Spotify is eating podcasting. The whole indie web could be emulated by Meta (it's not currently big enough for them to care). Much like capitalism eating subcultures, the existing LCD internet will consume, commoditize and re-sell all alternatives.
The only exceptions I can think of are decentralization itself (centralization can only offer an emulation of decentralization) and freedom from corporate censorship, and not enough people care about them to make the switch.
I'd love to hear counterexamples if anyone has them, because I don't like this conclusion.