Not a comeback. My point is that no one cares about this space at all. We had for the past two years everything in our favor to dismantle corporate-controlled social media, but the people that are here have ridiculously small ambitions and seem to keep the Fediverse completely irrelevant.

How else can I put it? Imagine that you live in corner of the woods of Bumfuck Alabama and you say, "I'm so glad we don't have McDonalds around here", like it was some reason to be proud. It's not, it just means that you live in a place so desolate that not even McDonalds thinks it's worth it to open a shop there.

[–] leraje@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (5 children)

You're using words like 'ambition' and 'irrelevant' like the Fediverse is some sort of corporate entity. It's not - that's a point very much in its favour in the opinion of quite a lot of people on it. Contrary to your opinion that no one cares, lots do. What some of us don't care about is catering to a set of people who are paid to express opinions and who, it seems to me, over a period of time end up becoming Andrew Tate or Russel Brand.

There's no McDonalds in the town I currently live in, which is 20 minutes away from one of the largest cities in the country. It might come as a massive shock to you but I - and I think the majority of people - can survive just fine without a Mickey D's. Not having one doesn't make a place desolate, it makes it healthier. And if someone really wants a Big Mac, they can go and get one from elsewhere.

Do you see what I'm saying? This isn't the same place as that - it's quite nice to have a place online that still isn't. And for those that do want that, they can still spend time there if they chose to.

[–] rglullis@communick.news 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

people (...) can survive just fine without a Mickey D’s. Not having one doesn’t make a place desolate, it makes it healthier.

That's faulty logic. The presence or absence of a fast-food chain does not indicate that people eat better or worse than a place without. If you live in the US (and maybe the UK) I can bet a $100 with you right now that the average person in your town is heavier and more prone to metabolic diseases than the average person where I live (Berlin, Germany). Even if I am surrounded by probably a dozen Döner shops from my building, I am not forced to eat there. On the other hand, on average we eat less processed food, the restaurants are not serving those ridiculous oversized meals, the European lifestyle requires more physical activity, etc.

Likewise to the social networks. You are just saying "I don't want Andrew Tate". A big network is not just made up of assholes. The presence of some assholes does not imply that the average user is an asshole, and it also does not mean that you need to deal with them. But a small social network does unfortunately implies that there will be less of the good people.

Instead of saying who you don't want, have you actually tried reaching out to the people that you do want to see here? Can you honestly say that you can find a diverse range of people that talk or work with things that are of your interests? Because I surely can not, and I am not one to have an extremely long list of interests and hobbies...

And for those that do want that, they can still spend time there if they chose to.

No, that's absolutely the problem. I don't want to go to Reddit, because of Reddit management. My problem with Reddit is not the "average redditor", or "power-tripping moderators of popular subs" because I never went to Reddit to talk with the "average redditor" and I don't care about "popular subs".

Personally, even the API changes wouldn't affect me. I used old.reddit to browse on desktop and I was never a big user on mobile. But the reason that I decided to leave was because Reddit decided to complete turn against its users to pursue relentless growth.

By "going to Reddit when I want", I am still enabling Reddit and I am complacent with the status quo. I can only solve "my" problem by having people out of Reddit and into an open alternative that is more resistant to enshittification.

[–] obbeel@lemmy.eco.br 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm tired of people arguing that the sum of the people in the platform does not equal its culture. Facebook and other social networks clearly benefit from having influencers in their platform, and they make the platform orbit around it.

People who use facebook are not responsible for old people posting what they want. But also, Facebook earns profit from that kind of behavior, so it makes its algorithms circle around it.

It's like saying Instagram isn't responsible for all the influencers and the 'vibe' it has. It is responsible for it and you don't make the platform your own, especially not with the Big players.

Even Mastodon, where you can set up your own instance, has its culture, even if it is richer (culturally) than Instagram or Facebook.

No, each person does not make the platform their own or make out of it what they will. Only a masochist would stay on Facebook preaching their own culture while they have other options that fit better.

Your argument fails.

Also, on another note, I'm tired of Carl Sagan's atheists using Darwinism as basis for lack of a God, and I'm not a christian or muslim. That's just reason to silence people who don't want to take "scientific" argument at face value. True science is debatable and built upon healthy discussion. Not something you toss at other people to make them seem dumb or preach like a religion.

[–] rglullis@communick.news 1 points 2 months ago

There is a crucial difference. The cool thing of the Fediverse is that there is no central authority. There is no CEO pushing things in one direction or another to try to maximize revenue. We have here the potential for real diversity of groups and interests, but (so far) all we seem to be getting is a very tiny vocal minority that wants to complain about anything that resembles the mainstream but is unable to build an alternative.

I’m tired of Carl Sagan’s atheists using Darwinism as basis for lack of a God,

You are reading too much into the quote. I just pointed out that faulty logic. Nassim Taleb also talks a lot about this

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (5 replies)