Cited by 118Blockchain Technology Applications and SecurityPeer-to-Peer Network TechnologiesMobile and Web Applications

Challenges in the Decentralised Web: The Mastodon Case

Raman, Aravindh, Joglekar, Sagar, Cristofaro, Emiliano De, Sastry, Nishanth, Tyson, Gareth·2019·Proceedings of the Internet Measurement Conference

Abstract

The Decentralised Web (DW) has recently seen a renewed momentum, with a number of DW platforms like Mastodon, PeerTube, and Hubzilla gaining increasing traction. These offer alternatives to traditional social networks like Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook, by enabling the operation of web infrastructure and services without centralised ownership or control. Although their services differ greatly, modern DW platforms mostly rely on two key innovations: first, their open source software allows anybody to setup independent servers ("instances") that people can sign-up to and use within a local community; and second, they build on top of federation protocols so that instances can mesh together, in a peer-to-peer fashion, to offer a globally integrated platform.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3355369.3355572

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • As decentralized networks scale, infrastructure and content-driven pressures can push social networks back toward centralized control to address challenges related to cost, performance, and user experience.

    “As decentralized networks scale, infrastructure and contentdriven pressures can push social networks back toward centralized control to address challenges related to cost, performance, and user experience [95].”

    From Seeing the Politics of Decentralized Social Media Protocols (2026) · cites this paper as [95]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Raman, A., Joglekar, S., Cristofaro, E. D., Sastry, N., & Tyson, G.
Affiliations
  • King's College London (GB)
  • University College London (GB)
  • Queen Mary University of London
Venue
Proceedings of the Internet Measurement Conference
Publisher
ACM
Published
2019-10-21
Pages
217-229
OpenAlex
W2980412466
Cited by
118
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 10
FWCI
7.17
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • ACM Internet Measurement Conference (IMC) (publishedVersion)
  • Rare & Special e-Zone (The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Queen Mary Research Online (Queen Mary University of London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • The Alan Turing Institute under EPSRC grant (EP/N510129/1)
  • European Union?s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation program under the Marie Sk?odowska-Curie ?ENCASE? project (691025)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Peer-to-Peer Network Technologies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Mobile and Web Applications
Keywords
Mastodon, open source software, peer-to-peer networks

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review