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

271–280 of 604 posts

Re: Mastodon.technology Shutdown

#271

Post by solardev »

sam1r wrote: post #262
m3kw9 wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter shutting down would need a couple black Swan events, you shouldn’t avoid doing something just because there could be a small chance of death(not walking out side to avoid a meteor strike). Twitter by all means is superior in every sense, speed, network size, reach and content.

>> Twitter shutting down would need a couple black Swan events. Can you (or anyone) please expand on this with some example hypothetical “black swan” events?

There's a book called that by Nassim Taleb, about how extremely improbable events can have outsized impacts but can't be easily modeled...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory?wprov=sfti1

Re: Mastodon.technology Shutdown

#272

Post by vidarh »

EarlKing wrote: post #134
proactivesvcs wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You don't have to look very hard to find screaming racists, furries, and lolicons. They make no effort to hide themselves since operators apparently endorse that sort of behavior as long as it fits their own particular biases and kinks. Of course not. It's on the Internet. I don't have a problem with furries, people with bias or kinks. What if I'm one of those people, should I not be allowed to make public comment?…

> What if I'm one of those people, should I not be allowed to make public comment? If you do, do not be surprised when the service you're using gains a reputation accordingly. > And on the odd occasion I do, I just ban the user or the entire instance and move on. Yeah, that's actually part of the problem. If anyone can ban anyone for any reason then you don't actually have a federation. You have, at best, a gathering…

The big lesson from places like USENET is the opposite:

Functioning federation depends entirely on good tools for users to filter and ban people and content.

Re: Mastodon.technology Shutdown

#273

Post by artificialLimbs »

m3kw9 wrote: post #246
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…

Twitter shutting down would need a couple black Swan events, you shouldn’t avoid doing something just because there could be a small chance of death(not walking out side to avoid a meteor strike). Twitter by all means is superior in every sense, speed, network size, reach and content.

>> Twitter by all means is superior...

I hear they have the greatest censorship. Some say the best censorship. Nobody does censorship like Twitter. Not even close.

Re: Mastodon.technology Shutdown

#274

Post by i5heu »

seydor wrote: post #270
i5heu wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One could argue that instagram and Facebook where not profitable in for many many years too.

That would be a) false because their creators were having high incomes anyway and b) irrelevant because mastodon will be unprofitable forever

So you want to say that the Mastodon gGmbH that employees at least 1 developer and runs mastodon.social is not profitable?

I would check my notes on that.

Re: Mastodon.technology Shutdown

#275

Post by mynameisvlad »

m3kw9 wrote: post #249
mynameisvlad wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean if you’re saying human existence can’t be guaranteed 3 months into the future, then that’s one thing, but what does Facebook and Twitter’s stability have to do with the current political climate? And if you are saying the former, then Twitter and Facebook’s longetivity should be the least of your concerns.

Funny you say that, the chance of nuclear war is the highest since the Cuban missile crisis.

Which is why I said what I said. If the “political climate” were to affect the longetivity of Facebook, Twitter et al, then their longetivity is the least of our concerns because it would imply something much more disastrous has happened.

I personally couldn’t care less that there’s no Facebook around when I’m living in a post-apocalyptic hellscape due to the “political climate”.

Re: Mastodon.technology Shutdown

#276

Post by freewizard »

Hope things go well for Ash.

Gaps/opportunities for Fediverse community:

- sustainable mgmt structure and plan for large nodes

- features to import content while not breaking existing ecosystem (it's currently possible to move followers and export content only, but not import)

Re: Mastodon.technology Shutdown

#277

Post by mfer »

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…

> This is one of the strengths of a federated system run by people who aren't looking to profit.

People who aren't looking to make a profit (or even break even) means they are running a social media platform while funding it through some other means. What is that means of making money? What pays for the hosting and the time spent doing ops?

You can't take money out of the equation because you have hosting costs at the least.

How are things funded and why that way should be a conversation. Anything that ignores money ignores the reality of operating something on the Internet. That means it's not sustainable.

Re: Mastodon.technology Shutdown

#278

Post by isaacremuant »

cmeacham98 wrote: post #44
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…

Look, I like open source federated ecosystems like Mastodon, but claiming Twitter or Facebook will be shut down any time soon is laughable. I'm not sure I could reliably predict whether Twitter or Mastodon will live longer.

You don't know when they will simply decide not to give you access to certain data.

Look at email providers who suddenly decided "If you don't use it for X months, you're inactive and I'm deleting everything".

It's not about the service existing but people being able to extract and use what they've put in, in 10/20 years.

Re: Mastodon.technology Shutdown

#279

Post by wolfram74 »

sam1r wrote: post #262
m3kw9 wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter shutting down would need a couple black Swan events, you shouldn’t avoid doing something just because there could be a small chance of death(not walking out side to avoid a meteor strike). Twitter by all means is superior in every sense, speed, network size, reach and content.

>> Twitter shutting down would need a couple black Swan events. Can you (or anyone) please expand on this with some example hypothetical “black swan” events?

I feel like the cheeky cop out answer is that since one definition of a black swan event is that no one could see it coming, it's impossible to give examples because then someone saw it coming :p

Re: Mastodon.technology Shutdown

#280

Post by smcn »

pessimizer wrote: post #263
smcn wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

That's mistaking the map for the terrain. It's a networked system for leaving and retrieving messages. It's not a group of friends. The way you expect to migrate a messaging system is by moving the messages.

To confirm, I wish they would migrate posts, too, but I do not believe that the lack of that means that you cannot call it a migration.

However, your definition seems overly pedantic? It defines itself[0] as a social network with an emphasis on audience. Messaging is merely the method of interaction.

[Edit] "audience" is incorrect, I should've said "people"

0: https://joinmastodon.org/

Post reply on HN