◆ Semantic Web Catalogue

Problem thread

Central against decentralized

Where should data live: with a few large hosts, or with the people and groups it belongs to?

issue
topology
also governance
status
open
steps
12, 1964–2026
threads
all problem threads

Baran showed in 1964 that distributed networks survive damage that kills centralized ones, and the Web was designed so that no central authority had to approve a page or a link. By 2010 its inventor was warning that large social sites had walled their users' data back off. Since then Solid, ActivityPub, local-first software and AT Protocol have each tried to move data and identity back to users, and they disagree on how.

Lineage

  1. Aug 1964
    precedent writing ★ seminal
    On Distributed Communications: Introduction to Distributed Communications Networks

    Compares centralized, decentralized and distributed networks, and shows that a distributed network survives attacks on its nodes and links far better than a centralized one. [src1][src2]

  2. Mar 1989
    proposes writing ★ seminal
    Information Management: A Proposal

    The proposal that became the Web requires that existing systems can be linked together 'without requiring any central control or coordination'. [src]

  3. 1991
    proposes project ★ seminal
    Pretty Good Privacy

    Encryption without a central certificate authority: users vouch for each other's keys, a model its 1992 manual named the web of trust. [src1][src2]

  4. Dec 2010
    poses writing
    Long Live the Web

    Berners-Lee calls decentralization a design feature of the Web, since no central authority approves a page or a link, and warns that large social-networking sites are walling their users' information off from the rest of the Web: 'each site is a silo'. [src]

  5. 14 Jul 2014
    proposes writing ★ seminal
    IPFS – Content Addressed, Versioned, P2P File System

    A peer-to-peer file system that names data by the hash of its content, so any peer holding a copy can serve it, rather than one host at one address. [src]

  6. 11 Feb 2015
    poses writing ★ seminal
    Locking the Web Open: A Call for a Decentralized Web

    Kahle warns that the Web is fragile and lets readers be tracked and censored, and calls for a peer-to-peer Web with no central host: 'we need to lock the Web open'. The talk led to the Decentralized Web Summits and the DWeb community. [src1][src2]

  7. c. 2015
    proposes project ★ seminal
    Solid

    People keep their data in personal online stores called Pods, in open, interoperable formats, and choose which applications may read and write it rather than being locked into one platform. [src]

  8. 23 Jan 2018
    proposes standard ★ seminal
    ActivityPub

    A W3C Recommendation for federated social networking: independent servers exchange Activity Streams messages, so people on different servers can follow and reply to one another. Mastodon is built on it. [src]

  9. Apr 2019
    proposes writing ★ seminal
    Local-first software: You own your data, in spite of the cloud

    Seven ideals for software that keeps the primary copy of data on the user's own devices while still allowing real-time collaboration. [src]

  10. Feb 2021
    proposes writing
    DWeb Principles

    The DWeb community answers with values rather than a protocol: technology for human agency, distributed benefits, mutual respect, humanity and ecological awareness, since technology alone will not decentralize the Web without aligned laws, business models and values. [src1][src2]

  11. 5 Feb 2024
    critiques writing
    Bluesky and the AT Protocol: Usable Decentralized Social Media
    ↳ critiques ActivityPub

    Argues that in federation as Mastodon practises it, a user's name and social graph are tied to one server and each server sees only part of the network. AT Protocol lets users move between hosting providers and separates moderation from hosting. [src]

  12. 31 Mar 2026
    proposes standard
    Linked Web Storage Protocol

    The W3C drafts a standard protocol giving applications secure, permissioned access to data stored outside them, in an interoperable way. [src]

Recent signals

Dated events that show the problem moving, newest last.

  1. 1 Nov 2025

    Bluesky passes 40 million registered users. Bluesky[src]

  2. 15 Jan 2026

    W3C charters a new Social Web Working Group to maintain ActivityPub and Activity Streams. ActivityPub[src]

  3. Mar 2026

    The IETF approves an Authenticated Transfer (ATP) Working Group, giving AT Protocol a standards home outside Bluesky; work on an independent organization for its identity directory continues. AT Protocol[src1][src2]

  4. 31 Mar 2026

    First public working draft of the Linked Web Storage protocol, the standard behind Solid. Linked Web Storage Protocol[src]

  5. 28 Apr 2026

    The European Commission's first review of the Digital Markets Act declines to extend its interoperability duty from messaging to social networks.[src]

  6. Jun 2026

    Bluesky's mobile app has 10.4 million monthly active users, down 27% on a year earlier, against about 46 million registered accounts. Bluesky[src]

  7. 12 Jun 2026

    NLnet pauses new NGI Zero calls while it moves to a new Open Internet Stack programme.[src]

Open now

Under each question, the answers people have put forward or built. The catalogue gives no odds on them.

  • Can a decentralized network give everyone a view of the whole of it without someone paying for costly central indexes? [src]
    AT Protocol provides a global view through indexing infrastructure its designers call fairly expensive; ActivityPub avoids a whole-network index but shows each server only the replies it knows about.
    • A few operators run the costly indexes, and everyone else relies on them. AT Protocol
      AT Protocol's design: anyone may run a relay or an index, but doing so for the whole network takes significant resources.[src]
    • No one sees the whole network; each server sees the part it is connected to. ActivityPub
      ActivityPub's design: a server knows only the posts and replies that reach it.[src]
    • Users end up trusting a handful of providers, and the network recentralizes.
      Marlinspike's reading of web3: even with decentralized protocols, nearly all clients trusted the outputs of two companies.[src]
  • Can people move their identity and data to another provider without losing their social graph? [src1][src2]
    On Mastodon the server name is part of the username, so moving changes it; AT Protocol and Solid each separate identity and data from the host in different ways.
    • Identity lives in a directory that no single host controls. AT Protocol
      AT Protocol identifies accounts by decentralized identifiers, so a user can move to another host and keep their name and followers; an independent organization to run the directory is being formed.[src1][src2]
    • Data lives in a personal store, and applications come and go. Linked Web Storage Protocol
      Solid keeps data in Pods that the user chooses; Linked Web Storage standardizes the protocol so stores and apps can come from different providers.[src1][src2]
  • Who moderates a network that has no centre? [src]
    Mastodon gives server administrators the power to block other servers; AT Protocol makes moderation a separate, open role.
    • Each server's administrators decide, including blocking whole servers. ActivityPub
      The model of Mastodon and much of the fediverse.[src]
    • Moderation becomes a separate service that users choose and stack. Bluesky
      Bluesky opened its moderation tool and let anyone run a labelling service in March 2024; users subscribe to labellers as they follow accounts.[src]

Forces

Pressures that push this problem one way or another, as their sources argue them. All forces

Decision points

Dated moments when a decision or a deadline can change the outcome.

  1. 3 Nov 2026
    NLnet funding deadline funding

    Next deadline for grant proposals to NLnet's open funds (Restack and CodeSupply) for open internet software.[src]

  2. 8 Jan 2027
    Linked Web Storage charter ends charter

    The W3C working group behind the Solid protocol is chartered until this date; W3C members decide whether to extend or recharter it.[src]

  3. Jan 2028
    Social Web Working Group charter ends charter

    The group maintaining ActivityPub is chartered until January 2028.[src]

  4. May 2029
    Next Digital Markets Act review review

    The Act requires a review every three years after May 2026; the first declined to cover social networks, and consumer groups say the door remains open.[src]

How to contribute