  This paper explores two critical infrastructure proposals as alternatives to
the current state of the Internet protocols: IPFS (Interplanetary File System)
and Scuttlebutt, highlighting the political a priori and debates of these
technical enterprises. To do so, I propose to analyze the discourses of the
developers of these two systems in the mode of a critical discourse
analysis.This article highlights a particular form of criticism of Internet
regimes: infrastructural criticism, and highlights its variety through a
comparative study. Through these two case studies, we will see how different
alternatives to the current spatio-temporal implementations of the Internet
allow us to identify the agency dimensions of these acts of hijacking and
substitution, characterizing two quite different approaches to decentralized
protocols, yet linked by a technical similarity.
