21–30 of 201 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe each subcommunnity can be it's own server? Or will that not work because a user can belong to multiple communities?
That’s exactly the problem with replacing Reddit with a federated service. The opposite is true with replacing Twitter in which case it’s difficult to explain why a user has to pick any server at all.
I agree with the premise of the article. I’m a new Mastodon user trying to give the platform an honest shot, but I can’t understand why I would choose any particular server over another. Why choose anything other than the pseudo-default Mastodon.social? If I’m forced to choose another server, is that choice actually meaningful? I feel like I’m randomly picking between Hachyderm and TechHub.io and others. One advantag…
> ... but I can’t understand why I would choose any particular server over another. Email is often a good analogy for questions like these: Why do you pick one email service over the other? Maybe you think the domain is cool. Maybe you heard that they are reliable or have features that others don't. Maybe your university, company or other community you belong to runs its own service. Or you decide to host your own. O…
These are recognizably proven brands that aren't going to disappear next year, and which integrate with your other tools in ways that clearly provide benefit.
And back in the day before webmail was a thing, your ISP gave you an e-mail address so you didn't pick at all.
But none of these are even remotely applicable to Mastodon instances. So I'm not sure that e-mail is actually a helpful analogy at all here.
If you're thinking of federation in terms of "apps" yes it's doomed. Like with email, you have to think about it in terms of "service". The "gravitate to one provider" problem is there (as with gmail), but those who care can still have their own email services or use reasonable third parties. The tragedy of course is that very few people care.
Well since circa mid-2010s the Internet is apps. Or app-like centralized web sites (like Hacker News). People want to install a single “Lemmy” app on their phone that shows them all Lemmy content and lets them post to all instances, using a single account and a *simple* user interface. If Lemmy cannot provide that user experience (abstracting away the federation), then yes it is doomed.
I agree with the premise of the article. I’m a new Mastodon user trying to give the platform an honest shot, but I can’t understand why I would choose any particular server over another. Why choose anything other than the pseudo-default Mastodon.social? If I’m forced to choose another server, is that choice actually meaningful? I feel like I’m randomly picking between Hachyderm and TechHub.io and others. One advantag…
Who runs the server? On what kind of funding, and how long can it last? Are you served intrusive ads? Are your a customer or a product for the people running this instance? How hard is it to run an instance yourself, and what happens if you suddenly post a video that attracts 10M views?
So many questions, I know, that's too hard, gimme something easy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>but I can’t figure out how to make a user’s server choice actually meaningful in theory, the instance-specific bit of it is the moderation. the one you sign up with chooses which other instances to federate with, as well as how to moderate the content on their own instance. in theory, you could sign up for an instance that only allowed the sort of politics you agree with, or that had very lax moderation, or that had…
> unfortunately, none of the fediverse seems to actually talk about this so without signing up and using an instance for a while to see what the moderation policies are like there's no way to know. Correct, but that's why you can actually migrate your account (including your followers!) from one instance another. The initial choice doesn't matter too much. Just migrate if you don't like it. That's why there isn't muc…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well since circa mid-2010s the Internet is apps. Or app-like centralized web sites (like Hacker News). People want to install a single “Lemmy” app on their phone that shows them all Lemmy content and lets them post to all instances, using a single account and a *simple* user interface. If Lemmy cannot provide that user experience (abstracting away the federation), then yes it is doomed.
There isn't even a single Reddit app. And the whole point of federation is that you can use a single account to post on any instance
If you're thinking of federation in terms of "apps" yes it's doomed. Like with email, you have to think about it in terms of "service". The "gravitate to one provider" problem is there (as with gmail), but those who care can still have their own email services or use reasonable third parties. The tragedy of course is that very few people care.
Well since circa mid-2010s the Internet is apps. Or app-like centralized web sites (like Hacker News). People want to install a single “Lemmy” app on their phone that shows them all Lemmy content and lets them post to all instances, using a single account and a *simple* user interface. If Lemmy cannot provide that user experience (abstracting away the federation), then yes it is doomed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There isn't even a single Reddit app. And the whole point of federation is that you can use a single account to post on any instance
Why would you post on many instances? Shouldn't you be posting on _your_ instance, that people you authorized can view?
I agree with the premise of the article. I’m a new Mastodon user trying to give the platform an honest shot, but I can’t understand why I would choose any particular server over another. Why choose anything other than the pseudo-default Mastodon.social? If I’m forced to choose another server, is that choice actually meaningful? I feel like I’m randomly picking between Hachyderm and TechHub.io and others. One advantag…
Yes, all problematic users don’t congregate on the same server. Problematic users can pop up anywhere. However, a server could fail to moderate effectively and become a source of misinformation and trolling. That’s the benefit of federation: it ensures a minimum level of moderation quality. Servers that don’t moderate are blocked, which sets up the proper incentives.
Servers defederating because of viagra/nigerian prince/etc. spam is one thing. A "lefty politics" server defederating with a "righty politics" server or vice-versa because they just want an echo chamber? Sure, you do you. General-purpose defederating other general-purpose servers because of "misinformation" and "trolling", when those terms basically mean "disagreeing with the current mainstream narrative on any controversial issue"? That's absurd. The generally-accepted issue with social media was for years that it created echo chambers. Now people are trying to use mastodon to create even more powerful echo chambers.
I agree with the premise of the article. I’m a new Mastodon user trying to give the platform an honest shot, but I can’t understand why I would choose any particular server over another. Why choose anything other than the pseudo-default Mastodon.social? If I’m forced to choose another server, is that choice actually meaningful? I feel like I’m randomly picking between Hachyderm and TechHub.io and others. One advantag…