Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: What are decentralized Twitter alternatives?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 239 posts

Re: Ask HN: What are decentralized Twitter alternatives?

#221

Post by redherren »

thebigspacefuck wrote: post #144

Every time I go looking for one of these open alternatives it’s filled with fringe conspiracy theorists, actual racists, etc. Example is LBRY. Bryan Lunduke says he’s switching off YouTube for LBRY, so I go there to check it out. Top trending video is some white supremacist thing why I shouldn’t forget my ancestry. Search for “how to repair furnace”, second result is video how Epstein is alive. Even Lunduke is taking…

I always fail to understand what motivates someone that likes censorship, hates Free Speech, and generally cannot stand to coexist with anyone too diferent from himself...to go looking for an alternative medium without censorship, supportive of Free Speech, and where those way different from himself congregate? When so many options like Reddit, Quora, Raddle, Fakebook, Twitter, Youtube, etc., exist almost exclusively for 'normies', why not stay at the echo chambers dedicated to them, where all the undesirables have been banished and deplatformed? What's the irresitable lure of these alternatives?

Re: Ask HN: What are decentralized Twitter alternatives?

#223

Post by jaredsohn »

Rumudiez wrote: post #181
jere wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're right. A little surprised about Mastodon because I've only heard that from people I follow on twitter who tend to not be crazy, but I guess it makes sense. I have an idea for an app whose primary motivation is offering a comment section for websites that don't normally have comments or have them disabled (yes, this idea is old as dirt and has been tried many times). The part I'm really struggling with…

> an app whose primary motivation is offering a comment section for websites that don't normally have comments Disqus has done this to a fairly wide extent. They allow site maintainers to moderate comments IIRC.

I think this is more about something like running a chrome extension to have comments without the site owner's involvement.

https://www.google.com/search?q=chrome+extension+comments+fo...

Re: Ask HN: What are decentralized Twitter alternatives?

#224

Post by AntiImperialist »

We don't need "decentralized" anything. It's expensive, impractical and unnecessary. All we ever need is a few uncompromising brave people.

Trump. Assange. Snowden. Lincoln.

You don't have to agree with them.

Look at Rob Monster. He has singlehandedly kept several domains alive which would have otherwise succumbed to the mob.

If Trump had joined Gab back in the day, it would be huge by now with a lot of users, and not necessarily just those who agree with him... except he would still have his account.

Re: Ask HN: What are decentralized Twitter alternatives?

#225

Post by clairity »

mumblemumble wrote: post #143
clairity wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

for better discussion, 280 would be a minimum rather than a maximum, but twitter doesn't want better discussion as that also depresses engagement.

Maybe? But, on the other hand, even at 147 characters, your comment seems like a complete and well-composed observation. I don't see how requiring it to be 90% longer would improve it. I only got past 280 by counting just 185 characters, and deciding to add this sentence as filler.

it's not that you can't have a single, good point fit into a small number of characters, but that good discussion requires more than one good point, and plenty of nuance and thought. it's strictly true that the number limit is arbitrary (and only loosely correlated to 'goodness'), but assuming there is a limit at all, my (simple) point was it should be a minimum rather than a maximum, for better discussion.

Re: Ask HN: What are decentralized Twitter alternatives?

#226

Post by mumblemumble »

clairity wrote: post #225
mumblemumble wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe? But, on the other hand, even at 147 characters, your comment seems like a complete and well-composed observation. I don't see how requiring it to be 90% longer would improve it. I only got past 280 by counting just 185 characters, and deciding to add this sentence as filler.

it's not that you can't have a single, good point fit into a small number of characters, but that good discussion requires more than one good point, and plenty of nuance and thought. it's strictly true that the number limit is arbitrary (and only loosely correlated to 'goodness'), but assuming there is a limit at all, my (simple) point was it should be a minimum rather than a maximum, for better discussion.

Good discussion also benefits from pithy remarks, and suffers from bloviating.

Re: Ask HN: What are decentralized Twitter alternatives?

#227

Post by andresp »

watwut wrote: post #154
TeMPOraL wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, it's users, not tech (it's always people, not tech - Twitter is a problem not because it's centralized, but because of decisions made by people at the helm). What both 'tgsovlerkhgsel and I are trying to say is that there is this kind of realpolitik going on at Mastodon, of which you should be aware before considering to join. You start going against the "party line", you risk getting defederated or, if you're…

Freedom comes with realpolitik, always. At some point, people learn that their lives are better without this or that group constantly coming in and will take protective/separatists measures. Which is exactly what you are seeing.

That is fine when done at the individual level. What people are complaining about is when the platform makes that decision for you. It is fine to block a phone number from calling you, it is not fine to block people from being able to use a phone (by means of blocking access to all phone networks) without a court decision.

Now individual networks are private companies and might chose to have stricter moderation, but 1) that should place them in a different legal category, and 2) there should be enough competition to provide valid alternatives to the people being blocked from such networks, otherwise it risks abuse of dominant position, given the monopoly of access.

Re: Ask HN: What are decentralized Twitter alternatives?

#228

Post by ibeckermayer »

mhuffman wrote: post #205
ibeckermayer wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> not just turn into the first part after a time? It wouldn't turn into the first part, because "the banned" of some instance could go create their own instance run by their own moderation rules. > It would attract types of information that most of us would agree that we do not want around (child porn, terrorism planning, etc) and with any sort of traction, the government would step in to shut it down. If some instan…

> If some instance of a federated system is allowing child porn or other criminal content to flourish then they should be shut down. Every instance would need to be held to a baseline standard for dealing with such content. ... so moderation, then?

Yes, moderation. The ideal isn't a system that is un-moderate-able (for the reasons listed, among others), its a system where individuals can choose their moderators based on the differing goals and preferences of the online communities (but within some reasonable bounds/process for limiting rights-violating content like child porn, criminal incitement, etc)

Re: Ask HN: What are decentralized Twitter alternatives?

#229

Post by clairity »

mumblemumble wrote: post #226
clairity wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's not that you can't have a single, good point fit into a small number of characters, but that good discussion requires more than one good point, and plenty of nuance and thought. it's strictly true that the number limit is arbitrary (and only loosely correlated to 'goodness'), but assuming there is a limit at all, my (simple) point was it should be a minimum rather than a maximum, for better discussion.

Good discussion also benefits from pithy remarks, and suffers from bloviating.

yes, and pithy doesn’t necessarily mean short. =)

Re: Ask HN: What are decentralized Twitter alternatives?

#230

Post by jakelazaroff »

andresp wrote: post #227
watwut wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Freedom comes with realpolitik, always. At some point, people learn that their lives are better without this or that group constantly coming in and will take protective/separatists measures. Which is exactly what you are seeing.

That is fine when done at the individual level. What people are complaining about is when the platform makes that decision for you. It is fine to block a phone number from calling you, it is not fine to block people from being able to use a phone (by means of blocking access to all phone networks) without a court decision. Now individual networks are private companies and might chose to have stricter moderation, but…

We are discussing Mastodon, so that complaint is not valid. If you don’t like that your instance has stopped federating with another, you are free to join a different one or start your own.
Post reply on HN