it's fine if you want to have it as a hobby. It's not fine if you want to destroy Big Tech.
rglullis
joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
A dollar per year won't even cover the storage bills, much less the labor of admins and moderators.
Aren't you kind of making my point?
I am saying that the Fediverse will only be sustainable if everyone pays a little bit. Relying on a few generous souls to make up for the thousands of freeloaders will always take every instance to a ceiling which is, frankly speaking, very low. LW has 18k MAU. This number is laughably low for any social network.
"No such thing as a free lunch" (alternatively, "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch", "There is no such thing as a free lunch" or other variants, sometimes called Crane's law[1]) is a popular adage communicating the idea that it is impossible to get something for nothing. **The acronyms TANSTAAFL, TINSTAAFL, and TNSTAAFL are also used. **
You are right about the "under", though. I "accidently half a word", there. Will fix.
It shouldn't be like this. If we keep treating the Fediverse as just a scrappy, amateur effort, it will never reach its full potential and it will be forever just a niche thing.
The indieweb already has an answer for this: Web of Trust. Part of everyone social graph should include a list of accounts that they trust and that they do not trust. With this you can easily create some form of ranking system where bots get silenced or ignored.
Would you like to bring this to https://nfl.community? I was thinking of having separate communities for highlights and memes as well.
Hard disagree. It's true that the tech conversation has shifted away from Twitter post-Musk, but to claim that Mastodon nowadays Mastodon is better than ever was is just wishful thinking.
There is a crucial difference. The cool thing of the Fediverse is that there is no central authority. There is no CEO pushing things in one direction or another to try to maximize revenue. We have here the potential for real diversity of groups and interests, but (so far) all we seem to be getting is a very tiny vocal minority that wants to complain about anything that resembles the mainstream but is unable to build an alternative.
I’m tired of Carl Sagan’s atheists using Darwinism as basis for lack of a God,
You are reading too much into the quote. I just pointed out that faulty logic. Nassim Taleb also talks a lot about this
I think we could and should work to make the Fediverse an universal alternative. If not make it something that appeals equally to everyone, but to have a real diverse set of people and users. My litmus test is simple: my wife is still on Facebook because of different groups: parenting groups, events around town, some arts and crafts showcases... If I ask my wife her to take a look at Lemmy, will she find something that interests her?
So far, the answer is no. The range of interests around here is very small: sophomoric discussion of US politics, outrage-bait pieces whenever Musk/Zuckerberg/Bezos does something stupid, a handful of otakus, a somewhat-larger-but-still-small group of Linux nerds... that's about it. Everything else is represented by at most one or two people who had a sizeable community on reddit, but failed to bring them over.
How many users are on these instances?
(And you are still ignoring the cost of labor.)