31–40 of 105 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's like they want it to fail. This is software -- if you have a better idea create your own implementation of the underlying protocol: https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub/
There's already a different implementation of the protocol: https://pleroma.social/
The broad approach to social networking presented by Mastodon and other federated networks is "spend your time/resources on funding the network instead of paying someone else much less to do it." It wont "work" for the same reason everyone doesn't host their own email service. It flies in the face of a broader cultural movement we have: specialization of labor. For instance, the solution to content moderation and har…
That actually is largely the solution on all the networks, as most are trying to automate that task, to crappy results.
The broad approach to social networking presented by Mastodon and other federated networks is "spend your time/resources on funding the network instead of paying someone else much less to do it." It wont "work" for the same reason everyone doesn't host their own email service. It flies in the face of a broader cultural movement we have: specialization of labor. For instance, the solution to content moderation and har…
I think you're maybe forgetting that the goal of Mastodon, or any federated (as opposed to distributed) system, is not to have every single user run and administer their own instances, but rather to enable users to freely select from a wide variety of compatible interconnected peers. > People don't want to moderate themselves, they want a larger power to do it for them. I think people mostly want a smaller power to d…
This looks like a networking protocol, but this is actually process for electing the main node in the network, which will eventually revert it back to the mean of centralization. Let's see how Mastodon scales.
> I think people mostly want a smaller power to do it for them, or at least a "smaller than The Platform, or The Government".
People want the freedom of small networks while gaining the moderation protection of larger ones. People's beliefs about this are largely incoherent imo. That being said I'm broadly against heavy handed moderation, and so I'm happy to see it being solved by fragmenting the community rather than enforcing undesirable norms across it.
The broad approach to social networking presented by Mastodon and other federated networks is "spend your time/resources on funding the network instead of paying someone else much less to do it." It wont "work" for the same reason everyone doesn't host their own email service. It flies in the face of a broader cultural movement we have: specialization of labor. For instance, the solution to content moderation and har…
I think you're maybe forgetting that the goal of Mastodon, or any federated (as opposed to distributed) system, is not to have every single user run and administer their own instances, but rather to enable users to freely select from a wide variety of compatible interconnected peers. > People don't want to moderate themselves, they want a larger power to do it for them. I think people mostly want a smaller power to d…
No, it doesn't. It allows the user to start over completely from scratch on another instance. This is very much not the same thing.
The broad approach to social networking presented by Mastodon and other federated networks is "spend your time/resources on funding the network instead of paying someone else much less to do it." It wont "work" for the same reason everyone doesn't host their own email service. It flies in the face of a broader cultural movement we have: specialization of labor. For instance, the solution to content moderation and har…
Then why are there so many phpBB implementations still running and incredibly active? I sometimes think the same way you do, but then I google something and land on some phpBB discussion somewhere with an active community.
And I guess I'd argue: there actually aren't that many phpBB communities, relative to the numbers of people on Twitter and FB.
If Mastodon (or federation in general) was going to "work" we'd see no FB and tons more phpBB type implementations.
The broad approach to social networking presented by Mastodon and other federated networks is "spend your time/resources on funding the network instead of paying someone else much less to do it." It wont "work" for the same reason everyone doesn't host their own email service. It flies in the face of a broader cultural movement we have: specialization of labor. For instance, the solution to content moderation and har…
Ok, now what if I were to tell you that email itself is a federated system, exactly the same as Mastodon. All of your questions can be answered with "what does our currrent email system do?". Sure, most people don't run their own email system. But some do. And you are not forced into a singular option that everyone is required to use. Despite what people might claim, Hotmail, or numerous other email options are all a…
The broad approach to social networking presented by Mastodon and other federated networks is "spend your time/resources on funding the network instead of paying someone else much less to do it." It wont "work" for the same reason everyone doesn't host their own email service. It flies in the face of a broader cultural movement we have: specialization of labor. For instance, the solution to content moderation and har…
"The solution can't just be "there are more people moderating," which translates to: the network is much more expensive to run." That actually is largely the solution on all the networks, as most are trying to automate that task, to crappy results.
When every anyone mentions it you immediately think of the band until you realise it's that fringe social thing nobody cares about.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you tried Mastodon? You still pay someone else to run the server (or not, if you prefer), you can just choose who you pay, and which server. Sending toots does not require that you set up your own infra, re: the email example. > People don't want to moderate themselves, they want a larger power to do it for them. It's why we have representative democracy instead of direct democracy: people don't want to be invol…
> Have you tried Mastodon? Yes. > You still pay someone else to run the server (or not, if you prefer), you can just choose who you pay, and which server. Sending toots does not require that you set up your own infra, re: the email example. Right, you either pay with your time or your money, as opposed to FB for which you pay nothing at all. Specialization of labor reduces costs, federation increases them. > This is…
What makes you think FB is free? Oh you pay for it alright, with your precious, precious data.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then why are there so many phpBB implementations still running and incredibly active? I sometimes think the same way you do, but then I google something and land on some phpBB discussion somewhere with an active community.
This is actually my exact point. Why did FB come after phpBB? And I guess I'd argue: there actually aren't that many phpBB communities, relative to the numbers of people on Twitter and FB. If Mastodon (or federation in general) was going to "work" we'd see no FB and tons more phpBB type implementations.
Meanwhile, people continue to seek out communities that do represent the types of interactions people want. I’d say it’s succeeding as much as facebook is.