Discoverability is a huge barrier to entry in the Fediverse, and they’re not helping.

It’s hard for me to judge them too harshly, though. Fediverse devs do things I disagree with all the time, and users too. Maybe, in a different world, something else could’ve taken Mastodon’s place… but its forks stick close, Pleroma has the charm of a brick, Misskey is too 日本, and Misskey forks got Messy, and—

…Oh. That’s it, isn’t it? Mastodon is the best that ActivityPub has to offer most microblogging fans.

Thank you.

Whenever using this trick, I’d suggest using DDG instead of Bing if possible.

The subtle ways having a toxic community affects unconscious design decisions. It’s a message.

…joking, to be clear. Could be a raindrop.

On the other hand, an isolated community can also become a nasty brewing pot, reinforcing harmful behaviors and even intensifying them over time.

I don’t think calling them safe spaces for hateful assholes is accurate, but I understand frustrations with them.

There’s a chance duckduckgo does something similar, but sadly I can’t check at the moment.

Leaving a comment so I remember to try it later—unless anyone reading is willing to do so.

Yes, people chase content, which means chasing where many people are, but why did Bluesky become a mainstream alternative and Mastodon didn’t?

I’m saying marketing doesn’t cut it, and it’s not just about where most users are either, otherwise everyone but Threads would be irrelevant.

People bounce off both Threads and Mastodon, and there are platform-related reasons for that.

That may be true for some people, but isn’t a valid generalization. See the Brazil blocking Twitter situation.

Millions decided to give Bluesky a chance and a graph showed daily user activity quadrupling. Now, a not-insignificant portion are saying they refuse to return to Twitter because:

• It feels less toxic and healthier
• They have more control over their experience
• They’re finally having fun with social media again

Sound familiar?

And I’m pretty sure Misskey has more features. Hell, Mastodon as well probably. Bluesky doesn’t even support video yet.

The first sin of the Fediverse isn’t being small, that’s the second. First is being a pain in the ass.

This was one of the reasons I left, and I assumed most disliked the official app, but weren’t willing to part with the content.

Now, I think I was too close minded. Stuck in my bubble. If it’s not in a discussion about reddit sucking, chances are people don’t care that much.

App sucks? Didn’t think about that, it’s just an app. App really sucks? Whatever, they already use 5 other apps that are worse.

The medium shapes the experience, but isn’t an experience unto itself. Not that important to the average person.

Why are there three forks(?) of what I assume is Misskey? I think the original is still kicking, even.

With modern internet speeds, there’s no reason you can’t have full UHD-BR quality streamed over the internet.

Cost is a prohibitive reason for many (hardware, internet).

I do believe files are better than physical media, simply because with the proper setup they’re easily backed up and won’t degrade or break.

all the statements made in the article are sourced.

If only his sources matter, link those instead. Bringing in Lunduke’s article means bringing in his views. That’s not some special Lunduke-hate-boner property, if anyone linked an Israeli news website in a thread about Gaza, I’d call that ridiculous too. Articles reflect their authors, and you happened to pick one of the worst authors in tech.

You’re acting like the blogger is attacking you specifically or something.

Because Lunduke’s ideas can cause real damage to people’s lives, and I’m tired of seeing them. Again, I’m sorry if I come across as affronted—this genuinely, deeply frustrates me. And it’s hard to hold that down.

I don’t blame you. I don’t know how you found the article, or how you read it. But please reconsider sharing Lunduke’s stuff. The man’s one step away from conspiracy theorist, or hell, maybe he counts as one already.

Andreas said it simple (While in different words). What does your sex have to do with the project? Absolutely nothing.

“In different words” is doing a lot of work, there. But that’s a great point you made, sex has nothing to do with the project. So why did he reject a simple change which only made sex even less relevant?

And I ask again: which other side is Lunduke representing that you felt was important to include?

Purely anecdotally from what I’ve been reading online, it seems most younger folks hate Threads.

Not necessarily because of privacy issues or social impact, mind you. They also think it just sucks to use, don’t like the UI, don’t like the content—which turned out to include a lot of people trying to build a personal brand and sell you things. Just like Instagram, where most users came from.

Excluding content details, Mastodon fails similarly. Requires learning, unsatisfactory UI, more difficult to find and engage with content you like.

I’m actually just echo’ing what others have said.

Sorry, I don’t want to be mean, but genuinely, why would you reply and mention the CEO if you don’t know what the issue with them is? Had I not inquired further, would you ever add this context, unprompted?

Re: your move to LibreWolf, it’s your prerogative. If you like, keep at it. I will mention that I’ve seen a lot of misunderstandings regarding the latest “ad stuff” in Firefox, so I hope you got the correct picture to make your decisions, but I won’t bore you with details needlessly.

Lunduke is not a credible source. He’s inconsistent and has misled people countless times. I’ll still check it out and respond, but will also link other resources.

I noticed you’re not the person I was replying to, but since you’ve joined the conversation, would you mind clarifying who and what the issue with them is?

As I understand it, Baker left the position, and Chambers is only temporarily assuming it—that is to say, we don’t actually know who’ll be CEO next year, I think.

I might be out of the loop, here. I don’t imagine you’re talking about the foundation, either.

I was so excited for Ladybird, right up until I found out the project lead and main developer, Andreas Kling, is scared of pronouns.

Again, I’m aware some folks think this is annoying, but if you’re the kind of user who shuns Brave because the CEO does stupid shit, Ladybird probably isn’t the way to go either. Not for the moment, at least. People deserve the right to make informed decisions, so I’ll keep sharing this, and I encourage others to do the same when relevant, but don’t harass anyone, please.

If you don’t care about any of this, it’s a very interesting project. I just can’t say I approve.

Why do you think they don’t care anymore? Agreed on the Servo optimism, though. And I hadn’t heard about Basilisk before, so thanks for mentioning it.

Thanks. I know you’re not OP, but I’ll take this opportunity to answer anyway.

privacy preserving attribution

…is not as bad as many people think.

The best argument that I believe still has merit is this:

All websites on the internet—including ad networks!—are guests on our computers, and the content they provide are merely suggestions for a user agent to interpret and show us how it chooses.

If you agree with this—and I kinda do—then yeah, PPA shouldn’t exist. You’re probably a staunch user of uBlock (or uMatrix) and don’t want your browser engaging in any privacy-preserving attribution shenanigans.

But here’s the kicker: if you use uBlock, PPA won’t do anything. It can’t, even when left enabled. The only people really affected by PPA are people not using adblocking, i.e. the people being tracked all over the web, who would likely be helped by PPA.

As I said in a previous comment: if PPA works and is widely adopted, I can see the argument for how it’d be better—unfortunately, most people still browse the internet without uBlock. That doesn’t mean I’ll stop installing it on every device I can; I’m simply accepting that’ll never be every device on earth.

And for all that Mozilla is implementing “bullshit,” they’re also the only ones keeping uBlock functional by maintaining manifest V2. They spend time and resources protecting the very thing that trumps their supposed bullshit. That doesn’t feel like enshittification to me, but a group trying to do its best, even while stuck between a rock and a hard place.

What do you believe Mozilla was implementing?

However, its design is a little too complex to be used at small sizes, as you would in text or in a button.

I wonder what the criteria are. Because ⁂ just looks like three blurry dots to me. It’s not making things worse, but I wouldn’t say it’s making them much better either.