At the moment the internet is flawed, do you think the fediverse is the solution?
Before we had the fediverse - long before it - we had Usenet: people conversing globally in email-shaped units. It was shared and synched.
It was awesome. Questions answered, points debated, everything you wanted.
I don’t think the fediverse is a magical solution, but it does have a familiar feel to it. Not as good when it comes to spelling, but “it’s just the web,” so the rules are maybe different.
This is fine.
I think it could, and I also think it won’t and that it will stay in the relative niche. But that’s a good thing. So it replaces all social media for me but doesn’t bring the general public. Win-win situation
Would be cool and technically possible, but I doubt it will happen.
Big Tech throwing millions into marketing and vendor lock-ins vs OpenSource projects that are decentralised and often running on donations and goodwill. That’s a very touch battle to win, especially when most people care more about ease of use and amount of possible followers than about privacy and decentralisation.
Mastodon grew, but only took a tiny slice of Twitter and half of Mastodon are bots or people who crosspost to both. I expect the same to happen to Lemmy/Reddit, and any other SNS that goes this direction.
I’m content with a stable and active niche group of SNSs. Hopefully the open source and decentralisation aspects can prevent it from dying and going to the next SNS as the big ones tend to do. Which cóúld be as people can make newer applications that work with the old ones as long as it all runs on ActivityPup. I feel it’s the most realistic way of thinking.
But maybe I’m just too pessimistic. Even the biggest people in tech stuggle to predict the future of it. So who knows.
Mastodon grew, but only took a tiny slice of Twitter
Growth is not the only, nor even main, metric to measure success of fedi. Fedi is not a VC-funded startup that needs to grow exponentially to remain viable (consider how that worked for Twitter and Reddit…).
Building a resilient, safe, longterm-viable communities is the metric to measure fedi by. That takes more time, than hooking people on endorphin/noradrenalin high and slick interfaces.
half of Mastodon are bots or people who crosspost to both.
This is false. I follow a couple of thousand people and have an interesting, diverse, funny, and informative timeline. Very few accounts I follow crosspost.
There is no recommendation algorithm so your timeline is what you make of it. It takes a bit more time to curate, but you end up with your own thing that suits you — if you put in the tiny bit of effort required.
I am very well aware about the lack of algoritm and how Mastodon works. But the issue is not for me, I like Mastodon! And I don’t like Twitter at all. But it is for Average Joe, who needs to come over in order to replace the place of Big Tech SNSs.
Growth is not the only, nor even main, metric to measure success of fedi.
If the Fediverse just wants to exist stabely, even be mentionable in size, it is not. But to take over from the Big Tech SNSs, it is. People are where other people are. And that’s what the topic was about,
This is false. I follow a couple of thousand people and have an interesting, diverse, funny, and informative timeline. Very few accounts I follow crosspost Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy Mastodon. I also talk with some i teresting people there. But I still cannot follow any of the local news there without bots that copy Twitter. I also know companies who have accounts on both, and beside of reactions on what people say, their updates are cross-posted (manually). Not everything, but if you want to follow companies and people outside of tech-related scenes yoh already need to be happy if they have a cross-posting Mastodon.
For me, it’s enough. But for Average Joe, who wants to commend on their favourite influencers and use it to talk to custoner support of delivery coyriers and stores they buy from, it is not. In fact, customer support is the only reason I have a Twitter account.
That takes more time, than hooking people on endorphin/noradrenalin high and slick interfaces. Sadly, Average Joe just want his endorphin kick 🥲.
If the Fediverse just wants to exist stabely, even be mentionable in size, it is not. But to take over from the Big Tech SNSs, it is. People are where other people are. And that’s what the topic was about, replacing Big Tech SNSs.
Fediverse existed before Google+, then came Google+, then Google pushed it hard (including forcing YouTube users to have Google+ accounts), then Google killed Google+.
Fediverse is still here.
So while yes, it would be nice to have more people out of walled gardens, let’s keep stuff in perspective.
I fail to see how this goes against what you’re qouting from me? Unless you’re agreeing with me? I’m saying that in order to replace the Big Tech SNSs it needs to grow and appeal to the masses (which I’m personally doubting will happen to that degree), as was the question asked. But I also say that it doesn’t need to do so in order to exist stable or even become of a mentionable size.
Big Tech SNSs just get replaced by the next one. Yes, Google+ came and went. But Fediverse did not take over after that (nor was Google+ ever big outside the USA afaik). Just like how MySpace didn’t get replaced by the Fediverse. Big Tech SNSs aren’t forever, but I never argued that they where. But they tend to get replaced with another Big Tech SNS, if not soon to be’s (as Meta wasn’t ás huge back then), who have marketing power. Fediverse might be covered now more than ever, but the gains compared to Big Tech is statistically, still minimal.
And that’s ok! Because I too rather have a small but stable & good place. But it doesn’t make it that the Fediverse takes over the Big Tech SNSs place. That’s all I’m saying.
Building a resilient, safe, longterm-viable communities is the metric to measure fedi by.
100% agree, especially on the resiliency part.
A community with 100 users but will never die is much better than one with a million users but might kick the bucket anytime.
The way the Fediverse works, and assuming that not everyone goes to the same instance, then it will be pretty much guaranteed to exist as long as there are users. And this is huge in terms of community building.
Obviously there are also threats, but they are different threats than those that apply to centralized platforms. One of the threats, in fact, is centralization itself — if people flock to a few gigantic instances, that creates a central point of failure, potentially.
But there are currently ~20k independently run fedi instances. Some had been running for a decade or longer.
As I said, we’re here for the long run.
No, marketing rules the world. In tech, it seems to me that the average person does not give much thought to their software at all. They will use defaults or the products they know about the most (Chrome).
I do not think replacing centralized social media should be our goal though. I believe the Fediverse needs more diversity of content. Right now, I see a lot of people from the FOSS community. People should be able to see a good variety of subjects being discussed or shared. FOSS is great but it should not be the only thing we see.
No. And that’s fine. I don’t expect underground music to replace top 40. And there’s a place for both.
@Bicyclejohn I hope fediverse helps us return to small blogs and forums that we had before facebook and twitter took over. no more monopolies
Me too. Lemmy is a step in the right direction (along with the rest of Fediverse).
Yes.
Fediverse will go through what Linux went through. Be seen by businesses as an existential threat. Then face FUD and EEE campaign.
One day, likely earlier than Linux witnessed the rise of RedHat, Google, Facebook as prominent businesses that became poster children for Linux, new or existing businesses could be built around and/or on fediverse. They may as well come together to form an ActivityPub foundation similar to the Linux Foundation for all we know.
Email went through similar trajectory too. SMTP, IMAP, pop are are open protocols. Yet we have a sort of oligopoly on email.
Similar to how Windows did not die away because Linux came along, existing social networks may remain in existence. The availability of fediverse as an alternative would keep them busy
Not in its current form. Anyone who’s tried to start a tech company knows you have to make your solution simple to use. Making software easy to use is actually surprisingly hard, involving experts in user interfaces, a lot of thought on user onboarding and training.
Lemmy as it currently stands is relatively new-user hostile for non-technical users. Content discovery isn’t very clear, people are confused about how to find communities to follow, and the mobile apps are barebones.
That’s not to say it can’t get there, but until you never need to mention that the system is federated, I think a lot of people will be turned off from the complexity of using Lemmy. The community right now is motivated to use Lemmy and I would imagine a little more on the technical side, but getting your parents to use Lemmy or Mastadon would be a challenge currently.
As a migrant from Digg to Reddit back in the paleolithic era, I would have said the same of Reddit, the UI really wasn’t good compared to Digg. People got used to it in time.
I also remember a time when it wasn’t clear if people would want to shop online, and a debate about whether email could really replace letters, or if people would find it too complicated.
People will come to the fediverse if we give them a reason to.
I think it’s fine. It’s a bit like Linux users. We are maybe one percent of total computer users but we are plenty to create a very good community. :)
No. Fediverse is great by design, but is too complicated at the moment (maybe it’s just how platforms are set up at the moment).
The design is not too intuitive in looking at other posts from different instances/servers.
For example going to this post:
- Clicking
!freemediaheckyeah@lemmy.fmhy.ml
in the sidebar directs me to
lemmy.fmhy.ml/c/freemediaheckyeah
(different instance) - Clicking
FREEMEDIAHECKYEAH@lemmy.fmhy.ml
at the top of the post directs me to
lemmy.ml/c/[email protected]
(same instance)
- Clicking
Long term, the Fediverse is the way forward, but social media has staying power even if it dimishes from what it was. It will ages before the Fediverse replaces centralized social media, but I think it will slowly happen.
IMHO these are fundamentally different concepts. Popular social media is made popular by pushing curated ‘engaging’ content, rather than organic content, to monetize gullible users. It has become an entertainment venue, giving their audience a steady stream of what they want them to see, even if by force. Popular “Social Media” has rapidly devolved into a real-life MST3K. Users feel betrayed that the sites no longer feel like the social experience/experiment they wanted… but are users really wanting to leave, or just switch to voice outrage?
Alternatively, the fediverse doesn’t appeal to those wanting force fed entertainment, or seeking viral fame amongst family/friends, and outraged users will complain it doesn’t function like so-and-so site, or work ‘their way’. It is more technical and takes more proactive actions to engage with others, which is a positive thing.
Users think they can switch from Coke to Pepsi, but the fediverse is more of a mixed drink with some extra bourbon.
Could it / should it replace popular social media? Probably not, unless more mindsets change over what a social media experience should be… but it can fill a growing gap as this happens (which will in-turn improve features & development).
Unlikely. When users left Digg for Reddit the internet was smaller and the users more technically minded. And even then it was essentially just creating a new account. You need an one stop solution for users to migrate and federation by definition isn’t that. As a result discovery (and growth) is still hard even for Mastodon that’s been around for a while and it’s a relatively mature platform.
No, I don’t think the Fediverse can replace social media.
People are drawn to social media exactly because of its flaws. The algorithms are what keep people engaged.
When the first waves of Twitter refugees hit Mastodon, a common complaint was that the site felt dead. There was plenty of activity, but the truth is that Twitter’s algorithm was designed to be engaging while Mastodon is more of a “you get what you want to get” kind of deal.
Then there’s federation. It’s impossible for every server to federate and exchange content with every other server in the Fediverse. The network just doesn’t scale that well. That means you’ll have to be aware of communities on other servers and interact with those if you want to find like minded people. On traditional social media, you can probably find a complete community to your tastes just by using the search bar.
Then there’s the technical challenge. Federated series don’t scale as well. You can see this when a Mastodon post hits the front page of Hacker News and the instance instantly goes down as hundreds of thousands of requests come in, some users, some bots. Twitter can withstand being linked, but the server running on some poor guy’s VPS simply can’t.
Money is also a challenge. Servers cost money and moderators are only free up to a certain point. Social media companies can afford their servers, either through VC money or through conducting business, but there’s no profit model for the Fediverse. You can set up donations, but you’ll probably still be doing all the work to maintain the servers unpaid.
Interestingly, BlueSky seems to be going in a different direction. I don’t know if it’s part of the Fediverse (they are working on federation) but their designs allow for the things that pull people into Twitter while also being hacked by large spenders. Nostr also solves some of the Fediverse’s problems while introducing others, but I don’t expect them to end up as big as BlueSky. But hey, who knows, maybe someone will write an efficient bridge between these services so the Fediverse can enjoy the success of its competition.
The Fediverse is great for what it does, and for many people it will be a great alternative to social media. However, without the constant pull of algorithms and a way to make money, I don’t think it’ll ever replace social media. And, to be honest, I wouldn’t want it to; without a significant amount of extra moderators, the toxicity of traditional social media will just overwhelm all the attempted alternatives anyway.
Thanks for this insightful post. I agree that the fediverse feels different and that’s ok. It’s exciting to get the chance to build something new and be a part of it starting.
No it turns the problem from your account being owned by a company looking to turn a profit to random people on the internet. If we had a way of downloading our accounts and transferring instances then maybe.
Yes but people run these instances to get users and help the community grow. A company is trying to make money from it.
It’s a big difference because people hosting instances have no intention of making any money from it. It’s the open source mentality of sharing because it feels good to contribute.
You can just host your own instance.
