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

Mastodon.technology Shutdown

ashfurrow.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 604 posts

Re: Mastodon.technology Shutdown

#101

Post by lapcat »

oogali wrote: post #95
monkin wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And who will pay for that openness and decentralization? Let’s hypothetically say that Twitter is closed, millions of users discover Mastodon and move. Mastodon instances will be down in matter of seconds. How do you approach this? By volunteers adding more instances(that they can close anytime)? This will not change anything. Everything cost money and living in an “free” world bubble isn’t helping in any project ado…

Did Web 2.0 make us all forget how open IRC networks were run? Resources donated by an organization in the form of a server linked into a larger network, a committee that vetted new server applications to the network, volunteer administrators for the network and the individual servers, coordinated regional and global upgrades. And as network users increased, reforming under a hub and spoke models to improve scale and…

> Did Web 2.0 make us all forget how open IRC networks were run?

I haven't forgotten about the Freenode hostile takeover.

Re: Mastodon.technology Shutdown

#102

Post by rvz »

monkin wrote: post #93
proactivesvcs wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pay for what? It's not about making money. > By volunteers adding more instances(that they can close anytime)? "That they can close anytime", just like twitter in this example. Partly, yes. But that sort of total exodus would mean a lot of additional people contributing ideas and code to the Fediverse, not just servers, but by making it easier to run your own instance. Who's to say it couldn't be run just like an ema…

> Pay for what? It's not about making money. For servers that run Mastodon. > But that sort of total exodus would mean a lot of additional people contributing ideas and code to the Fediverse, not just servers, but by making it easier to run your own instance. Most users aren’t interested in contributing anything to the platform. Social media platforms popularity lays in simplicity. No one wants to run anything, just…

This right here. He's right you know. Everyone knows that Mastodon can't handle this amount of users and after 6 years, it's enough to see that by itself it has failed, (unless you count Truth Social as a great example of a Mastodon usage that has more users than Mastodon itself in less than a year)

It is not early days anymore and no non-technical user is interested in hosting their own servers for chatting with another person. They don't care about decentralization as even if they tried they will recentralize to the main Mastodon instance.

Re: Mastodon.technology Shutdown

#103

Post by smcn »

thrdbndndn wrote: post #100
smcn wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it does, but I do agree that it would be better if it did.

No seriously, I'm not being sarcastic. You can't call keeping merely the contacts without emails themselves "migration of email provider". It makes no sense. Also, you said "follower[s] don't have to do anything", but somehow you (the followee) on the other hand needs to actively move? What if my follower is on this instance too and they don't actively move? Shouldn't their account disappear (and you lost your follow…

False equivalence, it's a _social network_, and you can, indeed, migrate your social network.

Re: Mastodon.technology Shutdown

#104

Post by andrewallbright »

The unnerving thing about this post is just how I could very realistically find myself in similar shoes. I do many things and bet on my ability to learn as I go. Sometimes it does take some extra hours. Time is finite.

Why bravery to say "I don't know; I could probably find out but I cannot."

Re: Mastodon.technology Shutdown

#105

Post by monkin »

oogali wrote: post #95
monkin wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And who will pay for that openness and decentralization? Let’s hypothetically say that Twitter is closed, millions of users discover Mastodon and move. Mastodon instances will be down in matter of seconds. How do you approach this? By volunteers adding more instances(that they can close anytime)? This will not change anything. Everything cost money and living in an “free” world bubble isn’t helping in any project ado…

Did Web 2.0 make us all forget how open IRC networks were run? Resources donated by an organization in the form of a server linked into a larger network, a committee that vetted new server applications to the network, volunteer administrators for the network and the individual servers, coordinated regional and global upgrades. And as network users increased, reforming under a hub and spoke models to improve scale and…

As a daily IRC user I can say this: IRC never was reliable. Constant attacks, splits, nick squatting or other crap ware pain in the ass. That’s why it never was adopted as a mainstream communication platform, and at its peak it had maybe 400k+ users. Now most of that are bots and stale sessions.

Re: Mastodon.technology Shutdown

#106

Post by arcatech »

rvz wrote: post #87
monkin wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And who will pay for that openness and decentralization? Let’s hypothetically say that Twitter is closed, millions of users discover Mastodon and move. Mastodon instances will be down in matter of seconds. How do you approach this? By volunteers adding more instances(that they can close anytime)? This will not change anything. Everything cost money and living in an “free” world bubble isn’t helping in any project ado…

Yes, hosting is a cost and it is not 'free', hence the frequent downtime with Mastodon instances, even when they had traffic during Elon's takeover of Twitter many of then could not even handle the new users. Also, these users don't even know which instance to go to, since there is little to no-one to talk on there. If there are 'hundreds of thousands' of users then that means they have just recentralized on Mastodon…

Weren’t you complaining about mastodon having “no users” in the last big discussion about it here? Do you have some kind of personal issue with the protocol?

There are plenty of people using it. It has not “failed”.

Re: Mastodon.technology Shutdown

#107

Post by importgravity »

lapcat wrote: post #101
oogali wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did Web 2.0 make us all forget how open IRC networks were run? Resources donated by an organization in the form of a server linked into a larger network, a committee that vetted new server applications to the network, volunteer administrators for the network and the individual servers, coordinated regional and global upgrades. And as network users increased, reforming under a hub and spoke models to improve scale and…

> Did Web 2.0 make us all forget how open IRC networks were run? I haven't forgotten about the Freenode hostile takeover.

And yet a large number of channels and a large number of communities migrated seamlessly to Libera and survived.

Re: Mastodon.technology Shutdown

#108

Post by gbro3n »

proactivesvcs wrote: post #28

This is one of the strengths of a federated system run by people who aren't looking to profit. Firstly, they care about their users and are more likely to take difficult decisions, like the one Ash has made, for the good of themselves and their users. In doing so everyone involved has time to make an orderly move. Secondly, the service survives. Mastodon didn't shut down. The Fediverse didn't close. One beloved insta…

Though not a social service, the recent shutdown of Stadia is likely indicative of how corporate shut downs will be handled.

Re: Mastodon.technology Shutdown

#109

Post by importgravity »

monkin wrote: post #105
oogali wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did Web 2.0 make us all forget how open IRC networks were run? Resources donated by an organization in the form of a server linked into a larger network, a committee that vetted new server applications to the network, volunteer administrators for the network and the individual servers, coordinated regional and global upgrades. And as network users increased, reforming under a hub and spoke models to improve scale and…

As a daily IRC user I can say this: IRC never was reliable. Constant attacks, splits, nick squatting or other crap ware pain in the ass. That’s why it never was adopted as a mainstream communication platform, and at its peak it had maybe 400k+ users. Now most of that are bots and stale sessions.

I am a daily IRC user and I think you are exaggerating the problems. I can count on my one hand the number of times I have seen an attack on my nick or the channels I hang out in, in the last 15 years. Those attacks pass without much disruption (sometimes requiring staffer intervention). Nick squatting is solved by Nickserv these days. Splits do happen occasionally but they resolve on their own automatically without much disruption.

It is ok if it never gets adopted as mainstream communication. But for the target audience (like opensource support communities being the target audience of Libera), it works quite well.

Re: Mastodon.technology Shutdown

#110

Post by P5fRxh5kUvp2th »

afavour wrote: post #88
P5fRxh5kUvp2th wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can we stop villifying people we disagree with? I've seen it so much, I'm more inclined to believe it absolutely didn't happen that way.

Is it vilifying when you provide sources of a person's negative behavior? "I'd recommend against this open source project because it has a solo author who has a track record of not playing well with each others" strikes me as statement of fact, not vilifying.

About a month ago I had a mechanic call me pissed and tell me they didn't want to work with me anymore if I didn't trust them. I had been asking questions over text.

That this happened is a statement of fact.

I'm taking my old ford explorer over to him this weekend. Do you know why?

Because I asked him what was wrong and explained the intent of the questions. We've had a working relationship for over 2 years, he was obviously having a bad day. No harm, no foul, humans are humans.

And yet, his negative behavior is a statement of fact. Imagine if I then went around town telling everyone not to use this man because he "doesn't play well with others". I mean, it's only a statement of fact, right?

Point of fact, the engine light in the truck came on earlier this week, I called him up and then drove it over so he could check codes (O2 sensor needs replacing). Had a conversation with him, where he told me his wife is living in Arizona to be a live-in baby sitter for their kids new baby, and he drives over there every other weekend (I knew his wife was in Arizona, but didn't know why).

You're campaigning against a piece of software because you don't like the author. Not for technical reasons, but because the author "forced" (your words) stuff onto other people, then after these innocents reverted it back in defense of the whole of fediverse and he got mad and said mean stuff, so now we need to defend the reader (me, and everyone else) from his meanness.

If you say so.

Post reply on HN