Live data from Hacker News

Mastodon hit 10M users

mastodon.social

41–50 of 410 posts

Re: Mastodon hit 10M users

#41

After about 6 months hosting my own little private Mastodon instance, I can say the following things: (1) Whoever cares about that but the atmosphere is nice, cozy, exciting and creative. Zero toxicity and probably several magnitudes more meaningful conversations with people from all around the world. This apparently comes from the kinds of people I could find and connect with. (2) Hosting is relatively easy. I think…

It's interesting how many Mastodon users talk about small groups as one of the main selling points, because it's something most platforms do very well actually, yes even Twitter. Discord is another very popular place for small groups to connect, and do so meaningfully and without drama.

The real problem, and where Mastodon has been tested numerous times on and failed, is scaling to larger groups. When people aren't under direct social pressure at all times to play nice and fair. There just aren't enough tools available to counteract this on Mastodon, most places just rely on shared blocklists. There are very good reasons why shadow banning became a thing, but that's a lesson to be learned down the line.

For now, the fact that Mastodon in general isn't all that widely used is its strongest asset. Everything else stems from this but will not last long.

Re: Mastodon hit 10M users

#42
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

XMPP

but c'mon jabberd has been around forever and it's not making waves like Mastodon. Why?

XMPP (née Jabber) isn't a broadcast messaging platform like Twitter or Mastodon, it's a one-on-one or small group instant messaging protocol. It absolutely failed to take off as a broadly decentralised instant messaging service, for a bunch of reasons, but it absolutely succeeded in becoming a widely used instant messaging protocol, at least for a while.

Jabber was born in 1998, in a world where there was a handful of centralised desktop instant messaging apps that didn't interoperate at all - ICQ and AIM dominated, but there were plenty of others around too. Most of us ran multiple apps at once, or tried to get clients that could connect to multiple services, but this was complicated by proprietary and frequently changing protocols.

A decentralised, federated, and open protocol that let users connect to all other users was a great idea… for users. But it didn't do anything for the behemoths rapidly gaining users in their proprietary centralised systems, and it didn't do anything for ISPs who'd just have to run, and support, another service. Early clients and servers weren't as straightforward as downloading a desktop program from Tucows and running it, and in the space of technically savvy people running a system built on open standards there was already a well established (and heavily fractured!) IRC.

XMPP's standardisation in the IETF didn't really help it. While the IETF isn't quite as slow as more traditional standards bodies it's definitely nowhere near as fast as centralised companies with only one client implementation to care about. As the war for eyeballs heated up, instant messaging apps rapidly added features like sharing images (crazy! over _dial-up_?) or emojis (before they were called emojis!) and XMPP simply did not keep up.

Nevertheless, XMPP was the basis of iChat (or at least, some versions of it) until iChat was killed in 2011, and the basis of Google Talk until that was killed in 2013. It wasn't too uncommon for corporate internal chat platforms to be using XMPP in one form or another - Cisco still have a product today called Cisco Jabber. But the main thing all of these systems had in common was they absolutely sucked at federating with each other. Theoretically Google Talk supported it, but your corporate system probably didn't. iChat notionally might've but as far as I recall it had so many proprietary extensions and missing standard features that it just wasn't feasible to federate. XMPP did pretty well for a stretch being the underlying protocol for a bunch of proprietary, centralised, and siloed chat systems.

In the end mobile phones killed instant messaging platforms. In the 90s most of us didn't have phones, but at the start of the century that rapidly changed and suddenly we all had the same instant messaging platform right in our hands: SMS. Sure, it was never built for heavy use, and mobile companies often charged per message (50c per text in Australia in the early 2000s), but it was _there_ and everyone was on it, and in just a few years desktop instant messaging died off. XMPP never had a chance.

Smartphones, of course, re-introduced the hot mess of a dozen competing instant messaging platforms with different parts of your social network on different ones, all centralised, all proprietary.

Re: Mastodon hit 10M users

#43
I have been using https://streetpass.social/ to find more mastodon users - it uses the ‘verified domains’ thing in mastodon in reverse - you go to a website and if it is verifying a mastodon profile it gives you a link.

I’ve been very surprised how many people and organisations are on the fediverse.

Re: Mastodon hit 10M users

#44
Honestly I really tried to use the fediverse, but its not good enough.

Search is hot garbage, can't find anything useful, or what people are actually talking about, not that Twitters search is great by any measure.

Missing content when visiting external content, cuz why would anyone ever want to see or search old content.

Also most clients I have seen show replies in a really stupid way, you have to actively click to see what the person is replying to, its not visible in the timeline.

Outside of the English speaking indie-privacy-tech bubble (and germans seem to be very active on it too) its a ghost land.

In general I have been spending more time on hacker news and youtube than Twitter and fediverse, they aren't like pre-elon twitter.

Re: Mastodon hit 10M users

#46
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Zero toxicity ymmv. The mastodon.lol (which was a safe space instance) drama over Hogwarts Legacy [0] was a very good reminder that the platform doesn’t matter, its the people. 0, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34748195

> the platform doesn’t matter, its the people. Neither mattered in that case. It was just a conundrum. Something a lot of people wanted to boycott had a AAA game built for it. I assume you're coming on the side of Nathan, but can't you see why people were going to have a strong reaction about posts about the game surfacing in the feed? It was a wedge issue. I'm not on either side, except I am against those who actual…

> I think if they had merely expressed frustration

This is the fundamental fallacy of modern social media, that expressing frustration is action. Nathan wasn't going to change, and shouldn't have to.

The advancement of decentralization presents an actual action disapproving users can take: leave for another instance, even by creating their own. Fragmentation of communities is a feature, not a bug.

Re: Mastodon hit 10M users

#47

Honestly I really tried to use the fediverse, but its not good enough. Search is hot garbage, can't find anything useful, or what people are actually talking about, not that Twitters search is great by any measure. Missing content when visiting external content, cuz why would anyone ever want to see or search old content. Also most clients I have seen show replies in a really stupid way, you have to actively click to…

Is search really that big of a deal?

> Outside of the English speaking indie-privacy-tech bubble (and germans seem to be very active on it too) its a ghost land.

"Outside of the super-active communities using Mastodon everyday, it is a ghostland."

Re: Mastodon hit 10M users

#49

I wish they changed the name to something better. Would probably increase adoption greatly if they can come up with a name that doesn’t sound like a porn site specializing in bondage.

It’s all good if you need something more vanilla there is discord.

Re: Mastodon hit 10M users

#50
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" Zero toxicity and probably several magnitudes more meaningful conversations with people from all around the world. This apparently comes from the kinds of people I could find and connect with. " So long as you lean to progressive worldviews and see insult slinging at those that don't see your way not as being toxic, but rather just expressions of righteous indignation... sure, I could buy that line. A quick perusal…

You sampled one instance in a fediverse with thousands upon thousands of instances. Do you think none of them have a community more aligned with your worldview?

Most likely, yes. Those with a different worldview are cut off from the fediverse and many client apps blacklist those instances that gain momentum from being usable in the client app. For example, Gab.
Post reply on HN