Network effects are incredibly strong
Yet, Bluesky has grown to 35M+ active accounts, even though they started way after us
We have the advantage that we’re not growth focused
This is not an "advantage". This is an excuse we tell ourselves to cope with our failures.
The inevitable enshittification will do its job eventually,
And when it does, the majority of people will go the next shiny "free as in beer", VC-funded siloed platform and we are going to be just another "They don't know" meme.
Who is going to pay for those ads? With what money? There is no single entity here with enough interest in growing the Fediverse, and any grassroots movements that we do have are strictly against commerce.
The Lemmy devs would be making more money if they went to work for Uber Eats than as software developers, and I barely manage to convince people to pay $2.50/month to offer a professional hosting service.
We don't really need to "buy ads" to grow. We just need to get more people willing to invest in it.
Yeap, 100%. The extremists and the terminally online are overrepresented here, and that keeps the masses away.
I'd suggest though to not waste your time arguing with the self-righteous idiots and just focus on bringing more normie-friendly content.
My point is: if you have a ledger that the user controls and can use to redirect to different auth endpoints, then you don't need oauth. You just use the record in the ledger as the authentication mechanism directly.
I've spent the a good part of last year working on Fediverser. The tools to lower the barrier of migration and to get people out of Reddit were built. To me, it feels like it's the users and admins here that were not interested in pushing that as a goal.
Isn't it a little bit sad to think that the best we can do here is to wait for everyone else to get pissed at Big Tech's fuckups?
OIDC gives you federated login, but no portable identity...
Yeah, both. It's flatlining globally and down in the UK.
Unless what you are describing involves some type of Decentralized Identifier, let's please stay away from any solution that depends on a single point of failure.
Again, I’m not an atheist, buddy.
You don't have to be an Atheist to want a soapbox. All it takes is an insufferable know-it-all who thinks that repeating nonsensical slogans makes for a compelling argument.
Enjoy your evening.
Yet you imagine you’re in a “debate”?
No, I never said I was in a debate. Did I?
If you don't mind me asking: how old are you?
It looks like we are talking past one-another.
What I am trying to say is that "getting the user to complete a login" is not the novel part that is missing. What we are missing is a way for the user to have control over their actor ID, so that they use the same id regardless of what server that id is delegated to.
So, unless I am misunderstanding you, what you are proposing is an OIDC provider which could be used to authenticate on any other service. That's good, but it doesn't solve the problem that if we had an unified OIDC provider without a DID, all of the actor ids would end up dependent on the OIDC provider.