It doesn’t, but the mods (not just these ones, but of any technology community) never seem to remove posts that aren’t actually about technology.
Because the definition of what is and isn’t technology is arbitrary. Wikipedia says “Technology is the application of conceptual knowledge to achieve practical goals, especially in a reproducible way.” By that definition, social media is a technology (uses knowledge of computers and networking to enable online communication), but also so are most human creations.
By that definition the wheel is technology. Should we start posting articles about slight changes to the chemical compound used in newer snow tires?
I have a really hard time seeing a difference between X and Bluesky. Both are run by billionaires for their amusement and benefit. Why are people so hopeful about bluesky?
Oh, really? OK, that makes it definatelly less terrible. I guess I need to update myself about the organization behind it then. Thanks for the correction!
They got funding from Twitter and Jack was on the board for a bit, but he bailed and formally quit (funny enough he bailed because they did more moderation than he wanted)
Having used it for several days now, I can tell you the difference is that Bluesky is a lot like Lemmy - not filled with hate and vitriol, and easy to make it what you want by selecting your feeds and following things you care about while pruning the rest.
The people who can’t socialize properly with others are swiftly dealt with. Subscription blocklists make it really easy to just annihilate any possible interaction between yourself and undesirables. I have several blocklist subscriptions for MAGA chuds and White Supremacists for example. And when you block someone on Bluesky they can’t see what you write and you’ll never see anything from them ever again. Zero interaction from that point on. So the housekeeping actions actually keep the house clean.
Once you’ve done the initial housekeeping, it’s just full of people talking about cool stuff, and when someone crashes the party to be nasty they are quickly shown the door. It’s wonderful.
Also trying out Bluesky, and it is a lot like Twitter used to be, but it has the potential to turn out like Xitter is today, because at the end of the day Bluesky is a for-profit startup corporation.
Sooner or later, Bluesky is going to want to make money for its shareholders, and that means any of: 1) Selling advertisements, 2) Selling your personal data, and/or 3) In a classic tech startup play, selling itself to the highest bidder like: Android, YouTube, and yes, Twitter.
And with commercialization, or in Xitter’s case a fool with too much money, comes enshittification.
Lemmy is nothing like a for-profit startup company, as far as I know, but that doesn’t make it enshittification-proof, but at least it won’t take the commercialization route.
It’s not the unusable firehose that mastodon is, and it’s a lot less fediverse-stanny. (it’s not actually federated yet).
I kind of like it, it feels like the right level of engagement, and there’s a culture of just block the assholes, grownups are talking.
It’s worth a few days to try it out. Nice place.
Because one of them is actively promoting and favouring viewpoints many people find abhorrent.
The fact it’s owned by a billionaire isn’t the major concern for most people.
Yes. Having centralized ownership (to whatever extent) is a concern for sure, but it’s a hypothetical concern in and of itself: “what if the leadership does bad things?” Is different from “the leadership is currently doing bad things.”
Decentralization helps. But if the networks effects aren’t behind it, jumping from platform to platform when things DO get bad is also viable.
It’s run by a millionaire, not a billionaire. People like it because it’s Twitter without Musk. That’s it.
That’s a big motivator for the migration but that’s not “it,” people on bsky seem to prefer the way blocking on bsky works, especially since X made your posts visible to people you have blocked.
The problem is not that they are billionaires. But one is run by an obvious malignant narcissist, and the other is not.
One is responsible the other is not.
Here’s a very down to earth explanation of why Twitter after Musk became an ethical problem.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8zfgIgZ4c0
The collapse of X should’ve been the movement to get rid of social media, not replace it with another identical platform
…he said on social media…
Okay, so it’s a link aggregate, but still.
Why everyone’s so happy about BlueSky and Threads though is what pisses me off, and it’s that’s they are in the safe arms of a corporate daddy.
Submissive little shites.
You’re not wrong about Lemmy also being social media, but I view it as my methodone for Reddit. Long term I think I will get rid of Lemmy too.
I think giving it up is sort of a cop out. It’s like saying because all new movies suck, that you should stop watching films.
The good thing about Mastodon I feel is that people are more sincere than what you’ll find here, or even on Threads.
I also think Beehaw has a good idea by being strict. If you dislike the brainrot, remove the brainrot. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.
I already ask useful things on lemmy, find guides and read interessant articles, maybe Lemmy is not as bad as other socials
Decentralized/OSS platforms >>> Multiple competing centralized platforms >>> One single centralized platform
Bluesky and Threads are both bad but having more options than Twitter/X is still a step in the right direction, especially given the direction Musk is taking it in. As much as I like the fediverse (I won’t be using either Threads or BlueSky anytime soon), it still has a lot of problems surrounding ease of use. Lemmy, Mastodon, Misskey, etc. would benefit a lot from improving the signup process so that the average user doesn’t need to be overwhelmed with picking an instance and understanding how federation works.
Platforms like Twitter are incredibly useful for following public figures and journalists, your feed doesn’t have to be all brainrot. Having a similar platform that’s not in the hands of a billionaire freak is in the public interest.
But it is all brain rot since they changed their algorithm and started feeding me what posts they want to feed and showing me people Idon’t follow
So tired of hearing about this platform that, afaiu, is barely even federated and not really decentralized. Why the hype when fedi exists?
this is the only argument repeated and no one ever comes up with exactly how it’s not for the general public, only that it isn’t.
and don’t say algorithms. the general public constantly laments about how algorithms have ruined everything.
There are a lot of reasons why. Mastodon apps are not pretty. The logo is not attractive. The signup where you need to pick the server for some reason is confusing. The reputation Mastodon already has among the general public, that it’s the place for Linux enthusiasts, is not doing it any more favors.
You say that the algorithms have ruined everything but it’s just not true. Discoverability is dead on Mastodon. The platform doesn’t suggest me any new people to follow. The vocal minority against the recommendation algorithms is just that, a vocal minority. Recommendations are useful if they are not obtrusive.
I’ve been trying to keep my Mastodon account active for two years and I’ve been posting some random shit the same way I did on Twitter. I’ve been looking for some fun idiots but there are none, it’s all uptight serious people who are honestly pretty insufferable to read. I deleted my Mastodon account half a year ago and the one thing I appreciate is how easy it was — just a couple of clicks and you’re done.
I use both. I’ve been on Mastodon for the better part of a year and only actively tried Bluesky the last couple weeks. My Bluesky feed is thriving, whereas Mastodon not so much. IMO this is due to Mastodon is missing the major quality of life features of Bluesky.
- Add lists
- Subscribable block lists
- Custom subscribable topic feeds
- Optional recommendation engine
These things make Bluesky very easy to get started with and more powerful even than Xitter was. It’s simply a better product if you have any requirements other than federation. Getting a good feed up and running doesn’t take more than an hour or two. Mastodon is a lot more work.
Yes, its federation is more or less bullshit, but for most users, that feature is a distant priority when compared to the rest.
In almost every thread where this has come up, people have gone into extensive detail about why.
There are a number of you either missing or ignoring it. Which I guess is why the comment sections for these articles are always almost exactly the same.
Here are some:
-
The average person is tech illiterate, so having them understand what a “federated platform” is, is too much to ask. It may be easy for you or me, but we’re here on Lemmy, so that immediately makes us not the average.
-
The average person also doesn’t care what a federated platform is. They just want something that is convenient and works. Same as the above point; maybe we would be willing to sit down and figure things out, but others will consider that a waste of time and makes something bad.
-
In that sense, federated platforms are a major failure, as picking instances and creating accounts is a hassle rather than a convenience.
-
From personal experience, trying to find a Mastodon instance to make an account on was irritating. Some rules were too restrictive, some rules were too vague, other rules looked like they were created for sensitive little snowflakes. It was like reading through the rules of Discord servers. Not a good look for a social media platform.
-
Something like Bluesky tries to be both; a platform without algorithms (or only user-created algorithms that you can choose to subscribe to), where you can make your own instance or just be part of its centralised instance. The fact that the overwhelming number of people choose the latter should tell you enough about what people want.
and don’t say algorithms. the general public constantly laments about how algorithms have ruined everything.
Right, right. Much the same way the American public complains that fast food has ruined their health and yet 2/3 of the nation is overweight. Or how chain smokers know full well their lungs are fucked six ways to Sunday but they keep reaching for those nicotine hits. It’s almost like people say they hate the things they continue to reach for all the time. Funny, that.
Do I think the Fedi is reasonably within the grasp of understanding for most of the general public? Sure. But do I think anything on the Fedi stands a ghost of a chance in competition against centralized services that cater to the dopamine rush people are already conditioned to expect and continue to reach for even when several of them claim to hate it? Oh fuck no, absolutely not.
Mom said tomorrow is my turn to post the Bluesky article.
