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

Your Organization should run its own Mastodon server

martinfowler.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 245 posts

Re: Your Organization should run its own Mastodon server

#181

Post by googlryas »

slg wrote: post #168
googlryas wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's a false dichotomy because based on the statements of 85% of the people on hacker news, you would think that they have all the right answers for running twitter, and Elon is simply not following their advice. So if he fails, even if it is well intentioned, it is only because he is boneheaded enough to not listen to the geniuses on hacker news and reddit. Elon has successfully run more than just a ca…

>I guess I set up the false dichotomy because based on the statements of 85% of the people on hacker news, you would think that they have all the right answers for running twitter, and Elon is simply not following their advice. So if he fails, even if it is well intentioned, it is only because he is boneheaded enough to not listen to the geniuses on hacker news and reddit. But that is still a false dichotomy because…

Parody accounts that are labeled as parody accounts aren't banned. Parody accounts that may trick people into thinking they are real accounts will be banned. I don't really see the problem with that. If you ever look at any popular tech related Twitter account, you will see a ton of crypto scams in the replies from people purporting to be vitalic or other famous members of the community.

I just can't understand anyone that lists that as the first gripe or example regarding how he is running things poorly. Elon also lined up at billions of dollars from institutional investors to take Twitter private, and I'm fairly sure they had an understanding of Elon before a week ago. And yet they still gave him billions of dollars.

May I guess that you were an Elon negativist, or a mastodon positivist before there was any mention of Elon buying Twitter?

I'm not saying that Elon is guaranteed to succeed, I'm saying that it isn't clear that he is bound to fail. Most CEOs of social media companies that reach a billion plus dollar valuation don't have any experience running social media companies either. But somehow they do it.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree about the likelihood of Twitter failing. Would you like to place a friendly wager on it ? I'd happily bet $1 on whether Twitter is dead on basically anytime frame that you would provide less than 5 years.

Re: Your Organization should run its own Mastodon server

#182

Post by brodouevencode »

jerf wrote: post #16
brodouevencode wrote: post #2

NOW this is of concern. Is this more backlash talk or an honest thought? If the latter why just now and not six months ago?

I don't think there's any need to hide from this. For a while, all the major social networks were run by people who all felt politically much the same way. That has now faded, and it will probably never come back. So people who also felt that way politically feel the need to take greater actions to take control of their social media presence. While I do not align with these people politically, I applaud their desires…

> is essentially the null set

Perhaps, philosophically speaking of course, this is not such a bad thing? Maybe societal change should be slow and deliberate.

> The fact that all of the major sites sourced from a particular geographical location with particular dominant political beliefs was a historical anomaly that won't be replicated.

This is a good point that I have not yet considered directly, just through one-off rantings about how everything tech for the longest time was Valley-centered. I can't help but think that a shift away is a good thing long term.

Re: Your Organization should run its own Mastodon server

#183

Post by phailhaus »

riffic wrote: post #180
phailhaus wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's "email me at gmail.com". The article is about replacing a company's usage of Facebook and Twitter with Mastodon. They then link to their Mastodon instance, as if that's where we can find all sorts of external communication, the kind they'd usually have on Facebook. Nope. As a nontechnical user, I am immediately confused and closed the page without learning anything. The idea that a company could "reach millions…

I can reach millions of users, billions potentially, with WordPress. My WordPress is also compatible with Mastodon since I installed the ActivityPub plugin. I understand the federated social web has a technobabble aspect to it. I am sorry you aren't with it but that's honestly not my problem.

And that's exactly why Mastodon will never reach mass adoption. That's my only point: Mastodon is for techies. It is not and will never be a viable competitor to centralized social media. The idea that "companies should run their own Mastodon instances" as a way to replace Facebook is absurd.

Re: Your Organization should run its own Mastodon server

#184

Post by TeMPOraL »

yamtaddle wrote: post #102
mberning wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You weren't worried about it going bankrupt when it was losing millions of dollars a day and running in the red for years on end?

It was so poorly run that there's a chance Musk could have come in, fucked up pretty badly, and still maybe improved the books. However, given the debt he's saddled it with as part of the buy-out, their situation is a lot worse than it was before. I don't see how it's salvageable.

> I don't see how it's salvageable.

If Musk is so much of a shrewd, evil business shark it's been portrayed as in the last months, you can imagine he'll find some nasty underhanded way to attach Twitter to an IV with Starlink on the other end, and flood it with money until the blue bird is back on its feet.

Re: Your Organization should run its own Mastodon server

#185

Post by snapetom »

rakoo wrote: post #139
alexb_ wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's actually infuriating to read. If it's harder than "App downloaded, account made" then you've already lost. Anything more complex than that is a complete non-starter.

Lost what, exactly ? Contrary to the capitalistic world of Twitter, where bigger faster is always better, the fediverse is not about that. If you don't want to adapt and are just trying to recreate Twitter, it's a complete non-starter.

If bigger/faster/better isn't the goal of the fediverse, then let's stop talking about it right now. All this incoming hype is about Elon and Twitter. Let's agree to stop talking about it. And especiallyt the fediverse needs to step up and say, "We're not a twitter replacement" instead of all this "Welcome aboard! You're in control! Democratize information!" snake oil that they're fueling.

Re: Your Organization should run its own Mastodon server

#186

Post by EricE »

afavour wrote: post #170
EricE wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But if my organization sets up its own Mastodon instance I'm free to ignore what the larger Mastodon ecosystem is doing, if I want to. You have the same tools to block on Twitter. There is literally no difference.

Of course there is. On Twitter someone could sign up, pretend to be a member of my organization, pay $8 to get a verified checkmark and there's very little I can do about it. If I own my own Mastodon instance I can kick them off (or stop them from signing up in the first place)

If twitter fraudulently verified something there is absolutely something you could do - you could sue. And it would be pretty clear cut.

And all you can do on Mastodon is moderate your server - they can still be out there in the greater Mastodon community and there is even less you can do about that than you have recourse with Twitter.

All this sudden pearl clutching sure is amusing.

Re: Your Organization should run its own Mastodon server

#187

Post by Yoofie »

afavour wrote: post #158
TigeriusKirk wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To date there has been no change in my Twitter experience.

No but changes have been announced. Fundamentally altering what the "blue tick" means alone will give e.g. major brands pause. As of Tuesday (or whenever they actually launch it) someone will be able to register the Twitter account @C0ca_cola and pay $8 to give it a verified checkmark. If I were Coca-Cola I'd be quite concerned about that.

If they were genuinely concerned about name sniping like that, they could of did the same.

Re: Your Organization should run its own Mastodon server

#188

Post by dredmorbius »

latchkey wrote: post #46
vsareto wrote: post #22

Fair warning about this Mastodon behavior that can lead to embarrassment/leaks as new people start to use it: https://mastodon.social/@mmasnick/109299348553543784

Well, that seems like a spammers paradise. Hey, did you hear about this amazing product @insertYourNameHere?

Less so than you might think:

1. DMs can be restricted to followed profiles.

2. Abuse can be reported and admins will likely act. Such a spam would be a once-and-done affair.

3. I'd need to check the spec / code, but suspect there's an upper bound on the number of profiles which can be mentioned in a single toot.

I'm not saying there's no opportunity for abuse. But on the whole, and on a cost-benefit assessment for the spammer, there are probably more viable options for spreading a message.

Re: Your Organization should run its own Mastodon server

#189

Post by EricE »

afavour wrote: post #158
TigeriusKirk wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To date there has been no change in my Twitter experience.

No but changes have been announced. Fundamentally altering what the "blue tick" means alone will give e.g. major brands pause. As of Tuesday (or whenever they actually launch it) someone will be able to register the Twitter account @C0ca_cola and pay $8 to give it a verified checkmark. If I were Coca-Cola I'd be quite concerned about that.

>As of Tuesday (or whenever they actually launch it) someone will be able to register the Twitter account @C0ca_cola and pay $8 to give it a verified checkmark.

And what are you basing that assumption on? Where did he say that for $8 anything goes? If anything he's been very plain that was NOT going to happen, yet people like you still are willing to assume the worse? Again, based on what specifically?

Re: Your Organization should run its own Mastodon server

#190

Post by EricE »

jimbob45 wrote: post #162
afavour wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you can explain to me the way in which Twitter was deeply unpredictable before Musk took over because I don't really see it. I agree that it was a badly run company but in a way that meant it didn't really change very much about its product in the last few years. That's what I mean about predictable and boring. If you looked at Twitter as product in 2017 and looked at it in 2022 you wouldn't see a whole lot of…

Take your pick between employees acting as agents on behalf of foreign governments[0], suspending POTUS for rules not uniformly applied to other users[1], introducing a fact-checking system with poor community reception[2], changing the core feature of the product (post length)[3], or improperly collecting data and accruing fines such that the US FTC now has the company under tight investigation. All done before Musk…

Don't forget the bribes to get a blue checkmark.
Post reply on HN