149
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Dec 2024
149 points (100.0% liked)
Fediverse
28575 readers
408 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
There is already a fediverse twitalike called mastodon. I don't understand why anyone here cares about bluesky.
Because the protocol allows to decentralize each part, unlike fediverse
Is there any non-Bluesky server people can register to?
Because mastodon is the Linux of social media. One day it will be ready for the average user…
2025 is the year of ~~Linux Desktop~~ Mastodon
Because it has the users Mastodon lacks.
By that logic we should also connect up with facebook and 4chan, not to mention twitter itself. bsky is just another one of those platforms from what I can tell. It is fairly new so not yet blatantly evil, but give it time. We here are supposed to know better.
bluesky is foss and open to federation, why not bluesky? Also a mastodon bluesky bridge is possible because of this as well
Investors offer money, federation goes bye-bye and you end up with another twitter.
It's not about the code, it's about control of the servers and feeds. Decentralization doesn't just mean multiple servers. It means no single entity has special authority over the user community. That isn't the case with bluesky from what I can tell.
You are correct, if you take a step back and consider bluesky wholistically, it is DEFINITELY not decentralized.
By that logic we should be happy gazing at our own navels, shouting to the void, looking at empty pages.
Navels, but federated!
That's how I see nostr
Because it doesn't have search (at least my instance doesn't), doesn't show engagement so the whole thing feels empty like people are posting into the void
If the problem is fixable technical shortcomings, why not fix them instead of throwing up our hands and surrendering?
As a Linux user since 2007 I feel a little dirty uttering this phrase, but:
Because not everyone is a developer.
You don't have to be a developer to use Lemmy, yet it has similar features to reddit including search. Maybe there are sociological issues in growing its userbase, but not serious technical ones, as Usenet showed 40 years ago.
It sounds like mastodon still has technical issues . If Lemmy's were solvable, mastodon's are too. Otherwise, how did mastodon get built in the first place?
Just clarifying because I feel we're talking past each other:
You asked the folks in this discussion:
to which I said
to which you said
True. But that's not what where we're at in the discussion.
I'm quite sure they are solvable, but likely not by the folks complaining about the technical issues and choosing to use other services like bluesky. Because not everyone is a developer.
So in other words, I think your musing out loud about why don't we solve the issues instead of giving up and using something else is being directed to the wrong people.