241–250 of 259 posts
Is there a good way to publish to this at the same time as twitter, so I'm already established and can drop twitter when it dies?
In my humble opinion, that's what ruined indenti.ca back in the day. If you're mirroring Twitter and losing the interactions you have in GNU Social, your account is just a bot and you're not really using the social network .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, I mean... what is the difference between a user called mattl being on two GNU social servers, and a user called mattl being on two common, gratis email servers? I could go and make a webmail account called mark_l_watson@whatever.com and people shouldn't assume it was you.
Good point. Perhaps better to login with OpenID?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's to stop you from getting mattl@hotmail.com and pretending to be me in email? Same thing, really.
So it's still a major problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The goal of GNU social isn't to provide a social network. It's to provide social networking software.
What's the point of social networking software if 99.9% of the population can't use it for social networking?
I'm delighted that there is a general network of users, but that's not why I started it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quitter is someone else's interface to GNU social. You'd have to ask them about it. I'm not sure if the founders of email would care for names like Thunderbird and Icedove, but you'd have to ask them.
i love the openness of a protocol approach (like email), but i just don't see how it's going to have a chance if it falls down this badly as a product-as-a-whole. what lessons can we learn from slack vs irc? from whatsapp vs email? from usenet vs reddit? etc.
WhatsApp is SMS, isn't it?
But GNU social isn't a product. If you want to take it, add your own interface, marketing, etc... I think you'd have a product.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those are servers run by our community. I'd be interested to know if you have any alternative ideas: we don't want to pick one any one instance, but we want to give new users a thing to try. Do we just flip through a big list and show one per page load?
I think it would be good to make it clearer that it doesn't matter what server you're on, that you can follow people on any other server (I don't really know anything about the project, I'm just basing this assumption on what other people have said in this thread, and so a lot of what I say below may be incorrect, but I'm just trying to make suggestions). Right now you have "Join the federated social web No matter wh…
We're looking at revamp of our site, and this will be good feedback for that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So it's still a major problem.
No more than anywhere else. If you have your own domain name, you can host your own GNU social instance, or point people to your profile.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Reading the comments here it seems that people are missing the point by just joining one of those instances." No, they're not. They just want to get started and go. They don't want to deal with hosting or configuring servers. Many of them might not even have the equipment to do it. That's the experience they've gotten from Twitter, and most people like that.
Yes, many people value convinience above freedom. This doesn't make it moral or good.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's the point of social networking software if 99.9% of the population can't use it for social networking?
"can't" or "not willing" ? If people are not willing to invest five minutes or so what to choose then they should stick with FB and Twitter where they don't think about the consequences of releasing all their private data anyway.