I’m all in on the Fediverse. It’s messy and a little confusing, but it has the best shot at making things better for all. Including corporations.
post
For the past several years as "social networking" morphed into "social media" and we saw the way it was wriggling into every corner of life, even to the point of affecting elections across the globe, I was worried more and more.
As we've sort of come to grips with the inherent flaws or evils or whatever of social media, I am expecting a time in the not too distant future where we'll look back at the social media era with contempt, disgust, and shame (if we can remember how to feel shame).
I am expecting a time in the not too distant future where we’ll look back at the social media era with contempt, disgust, and shame
I genuinely hope this is the end of social media. It's been growing more and more toxic every second for years. When my Facebook feed went from interesting events in people's lives to nothing but opinion pieces (THAT NOBODY ASKED FOR), I got rid of that shit. That was years ago and it's just gotten worse since then. Absolute failed experiment that has genuinely made the world a worse place.
I don't really mind seeing this cycle wind down, however it does raise a question that's existed even at the height of these centralized platforms...What the hell do we use to chat with individuals online? Discord might work okay in small groups, but it's still a single company-owned platform, so those free servers aren't going to last and you'll lose that space eventually. The only big name alternatives that come to mind for decent cross-platform carrier independent chat are either owned by Meta/Facebook (Messenger/WhatsApp), or are Snapchat or Telegram.
Meta's problems are obvious to those that follow tech.
Snapchat's in a weird limbo so far as I'm aware, where it's no longer as popular as it once was, as younger demographics I think are skewing to TikTok now, and I don't know that it ever really saw wider or consistent adoption outside of those demographics. Beyond that Snapchat is just another single company desperately trying to monetize their platform as much as the rest.
Telegram's probably the most viable competitor to WhatsApp if I'm not mistaken, but the head of it & group behind it are as questionable as Meta/Facebook, at least imo.
I guess the real alternatives might be to try to set up and host one's own IRC/XMPP/Matrix servers, but...That seems impractical for small group chats, no? Or maybe it's not as costly nor cumbersome to spin up & maintain as someone not too familiar with it might think? 🤷
Edit: As to email as another option for individual comms, uhh, well all I know is that's probably the one thing you'll frequently see many self-hosting folks recommend against trying to host yourself due to major email providers by & large blocking random small self-hosted email servers.
Signal is the best choice for privacy/security but sadly most people just stick with what they're used to.
A small problem I see with Signal though is the phone number requirement. Maybe it's just me, but I'd rather not bind a chat app to a phone number...There's the privacy/security benefits, sure, but also some added clunkiness with a new device/number (particularly if the old device was broken or lost).
You can also use one of the many open servers or the main Matrix one. It doesn’t matter, it’s all encrypted and federated.
It kind of does matter though...Maybe not a ton to those just chatting in them, but if you're relying on someone else's hosting, it's only as good as long as it's hosted (and as good as its admins/mods). Part of the reason I'd be a little more interested in sorting out hosting for smaller scale chat stuff myself, as of the many things you could self-host, it's up there as one that makes more sense to me.
Also just checked out Delta.chat, and that's pretty sick! Thanks!
Signal has over 100M downloads on the Play Store for Android alone. I think it's well into the big names territory albeit at the lower end of the scale. As a non-profit, the Signal Foundation can probably hold the front for now as the go-to alternative to for-profit data farms for messaging.
Bring back big Usenet!
I don't agree with the author's conclusion. I believe that Fediverse and FOSS software will eventually become better and less daunting for users to use. They will eventually rule the social scene.
Why? Enshittification. Capitalist platforms objective is to make money. As long as that's their objective, they will always become worse. FOSS projects are truly social project where the ultimate objective is to create libre software for the sake of human connection. Money is not the ultimate leitmotiv of FOSS.
I don’t agree with the author’s conclusion. I believe that Fediverse and FOSS software will eventually become better and less daunting for users to use. They will eventually rule the social scene.
I would love this to be the case. But as a greybeard, I seriously doubt it. The masses will usually gravitate to places that explicitly cater to them. That usually means good UX and reliability. That usually means an org (read: company) spending lots of resources keeping things up and improving on UI.
That said, I'm personally willing to sacrifice a lot to be out of a walled garden. My hope is that the fediverse at least has a strong community, maybe ideally without the masses. Gotta start somewhere at least.
“What’s next appears to be chat rooms, and group chats, and forums.”
That’s not next, that’s where it began my friend, and I’m happy to see it. Being here reminds me of the wild west days of the net. Smaller amounts of content but enough to keep me busy, and good, civil discussions with people.
I think the Fediverse is showing us a new future, but we're not there yet.
What I'm thinking of is each person has their own, personal, 'instance' online. It uses ActivityPub (or what replaces it) to connect to others. You can post a thought (microblog), or longer thoughts (blog), a photo (pixelfed), a video (peertube), a sound clip (??? - suggestions for Soundcloud-like Federation), etc., all on your own instance.
All controlled by you with others linking to your instance and/or your posts. Hubs like Lemmy, Mastodon, Pixelfed, etc., can all have User Profiles that you setup that aggregate your data to their hub. Lemmy would be setup to pull in any links you share on your blog, with comments to that share being microblogs/blogs that interacted with your post. Your Mastodon profile would pull in those microblogs with links back to the source/origin. Pixelfed would pull in any pictures in the links, plus any posted by user replies.
Every post would have associated "Traits" to define what type of media it contains. Posts would also have hashtags as a more granular and customizable way of defining media. AI makes these things semi-automated.
You could block traits, hashtags, hubs, instances, etc. to tailor exactly what type of experience you want to have. You could also block data scrappers, etc., from your instance if we can't get government to protect them by law for us.
So this is where I hope we're heading with a federated network of users.
That's a good way to distribute the storage load, not sure about speed and fetching, but it vaguely reminds me of P2P and IPFS. In the end, it's just a continuum in Ninstances, users/instance, communities/instance, instances/server... https://discuss.ipfs.tech/t/activitypub-integration-with-ipfs/4081
Decentralization was a thing back in the 1990s and 2000s with all of the little message board communities out there. I think people desire centralization without the drawbacks of control going to a small group of people so that's why we have the fediverse.
Like all this is more of a move back to how the Internet once worked. It's nothing new (at least to those of us who grew up with the Internet in the 1990s and 2000s).
Hey, at least they acknowledge the existence of Lemmy and the Fediverse. They are right that it's still developing and not quite polished enough for mainstream adaptation, though Mastodon is pretty much getting there.
Another journalist behind the curve. I just want to point out, none of those arguments are new, we've been saying that shit for awhile now. He could've written the same article weeks ago.
Getting tired of these articles softballing the leaders of these companies, and then turning around and crapping on the open-source, federated alternatives.
But its the media, specifically the verge. They're going to defend the status quo, regardless of whats happening.
top 50 comments