this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2024
450 points (87.6% liked)

Fediverse

28380 readers
912 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!

Rules

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] audaxdreik@pawb.social 62 points 1 day ago (3 children)

All these "why are people using Bluesky and not Mastodon" topics are starting to give me a headache. You've been told and on some level, I have to assume you understand the reasons, but are simply unwilling to address them. When people say, "it's difficult to use" instead of understanding why they think that way, you just dismissively wave your hands and say, "no it's not".

If you want people to use Mastodon, you need to SHOW people the power of federation while HIDING all the rough bits. People want to go to where the friends, writers, artists, scientists, etc. they want to follow are and sign up for an account there. Simple as. In this way, they very much want at least the appearance of centralization. I don't want to have to get balls deep in an instance's politics to understand their moderation, who they're federated with, if they have the funds to operate into the foreseeable future, and how to migrate my data if any of those things goes sideways.

[–] Jackthelad@lemmy.world 32 points 1 day ago (4 children)

I remember when I first tried to use Mastodon and struggled with how best to make it work, so I asked what was probably a basic question to the Enlightened™. Instead of being helped, I was met with "it's easy, maybe you're just dense?".

Then I thought that maybe Mastodon doesn't have the kind of people I'd want to interact with on it.

[–] blind3rdeye@lemm.ee 2 points 23 hours ago

I've never see anyone respond with hostility to any 'how to' question on mastodon. What you've described sounds totally unlike anything I've seen there. So if you have a link to your discussion, I'd be interested in seeing how that happened.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] NorthWestWind@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah maybe posting it here doesn't really help?

[–] KenTheEagle@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Nope. Every post I've seen about Bluesky has me confused for this exact reason. If it wasn't for people talking about Lemmy in mass on another platform, I'd have no idea what the Fediverse is.

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 40 points 1 day ago (3 children)

rolls eyes

I thought the whole point of the fediverse was that it doesn't matter which service you use, just as long as you're in the pool.

[–] Cris_Color@lemmy.world 44 points 1 day ago

The problem is partially that bluesky isn't really the Fediverse. It doesn't use the standard, and isn't truly interoperable. Accounts can be bridged, but that's a hacky workaround, not actual intercompatibility.

And threads is run by a company whose human rights violations would take a week just to read out loud.

The idea that the specific platform doesn't matter isn't a blanket statement, it's a description of being interoperable, nothing more. Bluesky isn't truly interoperable, and threads is run by Meta who facilitated ethnic cleansing, mass rape, and the burning of whole villages in Myanmar despite countless explicit warnings that these things would happen if they didn't take safety measures (not to mention all the other garbage Meta has done or enabled)

[–] TimLovesTech@badatbeing.social 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I do not see Twitter, Threads, or BlueSky as any part of the Fediverse since they are all for profit corporations. Fediverse is about being free of the corporate overlords.

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Well.....I don't know why you included Twitter on that list, as they've NEVER been part of the fediverse.

Threads is fully integrated. You can personally block them from your end, but thats all you.

It would be like saying "Dominos doesn't make pizza. It has never been a pizza company". With your logic being that you don't like their pizza. Doesn't make it true just because YOU don't eat the pizza.

Bluesky I hear conflicting reports on. Some people say it is, because it can be, others say it's not, because it's not official. I get both sides on this.

But the last part......is objectively not true. It happrns to work that way FOR NOW. It just isn't profitable enough for the major players to sink any real resources into.

The fact that it's adfree has more to do with the fact that 60k people on all of Lemmy with most instances having a few hundred people "on" it, and also advertising companies not understanding the concept of federation.

I could start my own instance, and sell ads to corporate overlords. The biggest problem I'd face is the idea of trying to convince any company with money to spend that money on me putting an ad on for such a small audience.

If/when the fediverse ever gains momentum and becomes mainstream, you can guarentee that ads will be everywhere.

Because nobody owns the fediverse. Which means if I sell an ad on my instance, all federated instances will see the ad. Sure, you could defederate from my instance. But what would happen right now if lemmy.world sold ads? Is every instance going to defederate from the biggest instance, with the majority of communities? That would essentially break the fediverse.

We're all on a service that you think is immune to centralization, but forgot the core concept that humans like to socially congragate. Which means it's inevitable that there will always be one big dominant instance. Which means if this thing ever goes mainstream, the ads are coming, and they'll be on all the big instances.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] oxjox@lemmy.ml 27 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Mastodon emerges as the clear winner. It’s free from investor influence, ad-free, and controlled by a community that values user autonomy over profit.

That's a gross assumption that people care about any of this. The tech-abled and tech-writers are in as much of a bubble as the Democrats were this past election.

The vast majority of people using social media do so for entertainment and passive news consumption and a ton of rage bait. Who owns or controls it is entirely irrelevant - ex., TikTok.

Ads? You think people in 2024 still care about ads? I think a lot of them enjoy it. Moreover, if you're a small or local business, you want a platform that allows you to promote your goods and services. This kind of opportunity is what made social media explode. If you were a community business, would you prefer to operate on a platform that was strictly chronological or one that allowed you to pay to get noticed? What if you were an "influencer"? While normal people may dislike this stuff, it's this stuff that generates revenue for the platform and, like it or not, increases engagement.

This lack of openness confines users to BlueSky alone, making it difficult to connect with friends on other platforms without creating a separate account.

How has this prevented Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, TikTok, YouTube from succeeding?

You're trying to force a platform to do what you want it to do. You're not objectively looking at what the majority of social media users want. When I tell people about interconnected platforms, they have no clue what that means or why they would want that. They just want one platform.

You and I recognize the benefits of the Fediverse meaning one application to access many platforms. That may be a reality we observe one day but for now, nothing is fully developed. You're trying to convince people that robotaxies will replace vehicle ownership today when they're not done deploying them.

Mastodon’s structure, lacking an algorithm to push specific content, gives users freedom to create a feed that genuinely reflects their interests. For those who are politically inclined, Mastodon has communities and accounts covering all sides, but there’s no algorithm driving you toward any specific viewpoint.

If Bluesky has an algorithm, I haven't seen it. I get chronological posts from the accounts I follow with an occasional and subtle suggestion to follow other similar accounts. Many of the accounts I follow are news outlets, journalists, civic leaders, etc. Some of the accounts I followed on Twitter are finally joining Bluesky while less than a fraction of those are on Mastodon.

I've been using Mastodon more than Bluesky. I like the instance I'm a member of which is operated by people in my physical community. Today I saw that more and more members of my community have joined Bluesky, including my local paper. I can not express the joy I've felt this afternoon seeing a platform blossom like the Twitter of old.

Betamax was superior to VHS. DVD Audio was superior to SACD. You may think the flexibility of Windows or Android makes them superior to MacOS or iOS. Ultimately, it comes down to marketing and convenience.

How do you make Mastodon better? You have to get brands over there. You have to get journalists and news outlets over there. When CNN reports that someone said something on Twitter, that's marketing for that platform. When [the news] starts reporting that [celebrity] or [president] posted on Mastodon - then maybe you'll start getting some traction. But why would that person post something so important on a platform with so few users?

[–] Tywele@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

If Bluesky has an algorithm, I haven't seen it. I get chronological posts from the accounts I follow with an occasional and subtle suggestion to follow other similar accounts. Many of the accounts I follow are news outlets, journalists, civic leaders, etc. Some of the accounts I followed on Twitter are finally joining Bluesky while less than a fraction of those are on Mastodon.

Bluesky does it even better IMO. Their default feed is a chronological feed of all the people you follow and you can add additional feeds that have their own algorithms (You can even create your own either with simple logic through something like skyfeed.app or code it entirely from scratch). This makes it much easier to choose what you want to see compared to Mastodon.

The feeds are the strongest feature Bluesky has.

[–] oxjox@lemmy.ml 4 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah - it feels more organic to me. Bluesky feels like a more well thought out Twitter. Mastodon feels like something built from Google Wave scraps.

I'm not sure how much of Dorsey's DNA is left but it's hard to imagine someone who has had so much success wouldn't know what they're doing. The board could certainly screw it up, just as Twitter's did by selling, but it seems like they're growing slowly and doing things in a productive way. Slow and intentionally growth seems to be the growing trend in tech.

With that said, I'm aware of the funding concerns and I'm trying to pay attention. Where will their money come from is still a question. Will they use ads or subscriptions? I'd prefer the option for either and not both. Is it actually an issue that someone tied to blockchain is involved? I'm not sure but I'm open to a plausible argument.

[–] Tywele@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Personally I would prefer a subscription instead of ads. I hate ads. I'd rather pay directly.

[–] oxjox@lemmy.ml 2 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Wouldn't be too bad if they did the model of showing you a persistent banner ad with the option to pay $35 a year to get rid of it. I'd be down with that.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Emperor@feddit.uk 17 points 1 day ago (10 children)

Mastodon isn't even the best micro-blogging service on the Fediverse.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 21 points 1 day ago

Just to add to the many responses here with a simple quip on this issue (which I’m taking from one else)

The fediverse presumes people care more about independence than socialising. For most it’s the other way around.

IE: it’s about the socialising “stupid”.

Even for us techy types happy with the system here … it means we get to socialise with like minded people. The independence we have here is often secondary, I’d wager, to what we all get out of this.

[–] LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 day ago

We cannot win by changing the fediverse into something like what we left behind because it will no longer be the fediverse we know and love, all we have is the good fight of educating people on why it is better and ourselves as an example - a city on a hill to which others may flock if they see the shine, and it may not be a fight we can win but it is the only fight worth fighting.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›