Capitalist propaganda is rampant on the fediverse. We need to discuss ways to combat this. Most big instances -generalist, tech or something are wholly controlled by bourgeois people who would rather uphold state violence than democracy. What do you think?
Your analysis is too light. The state isn't some magical benevolent entity which is somehow "on the wrong path". The state is an instrument of domination driven by the dominating class: the bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie is against everything you cited. It will not slowly act against its own interest, willingly lose power and dominance. It will always fight for, at the minimum, keeping power.
That is why historically the only way to have changes that contradict the dominating entity's interest is for the dominated entity to band together. It's the only way anything ever changes: the balance of forces moves in the interest of the dominated. Women didn't earn the right to vote because men were nice, but because women fought for it. Social progress never happens because the bourgeoisie is nice (that's a very nice propaganda trick) but because the bourgeoisie has to compromise.
Waiting/wishing/hoping for the state to be nice, which is what asking for ubi is, and the "revolution without violence" the socdem has pushed about, never works. As long as the people who are legitimate are dominated, it will not happen.
Let's stop dreaming in idealistic what-ifs and act in materialist actions. The material conditions define our existence. Let's set our material conditions of existence, without asking nicely, and the balance of power will force the dominating power to compromise.
Going against bilionaires is going pretty left though
That's actually what the first Zapatist did, inviting everyone at the table to discuss, hence the saying "mexican army". That's also what the makhnovschchina did.
Yeah if you want to do the same community it's going to be harder, but if you want to make your own community with your own content and views it's different.
Also, the history of the internet contradicts your point, communities have moved servers since the beginning, there never was a unique central point for everything. Lemmy is a bit inferior here because it only allows you to see communities one by one, but piefed can group communities into feeds that you can directly follow. By not placrng focus on a single one piefed can push for much more diversity
That's because AP as it is implemented today is crap, it's a superficial compatibility layer on top of a proprietary (as in, doing non-standardized stuff) platform. We need to take it on its head and make AP the actual core then build on top but that requires some work
I like that communities/instances have opinions and go in a direction. That's what make decentralization useful rather than one big average thing that always pushes towards the status quo in the end. Make your own community with your own rules without all-powerful overseers, that's a system I believe in
No, I'm taking the data as it exists on the API ...
We can see a globally slowly downward trend, probably not good but I'm definitely not equipped to analyze that
Following https://tarte.nuage-libre.fr/c/fediverse/p/194717/we-need-more-users I decided to explore data a little bit more. I'm not the biggest fan of growth-as-as-target so I wanted to see how much the people were participating in the discussion.
I took the data from the API explorer in https://api.fediverse.observer/ with this query:
query {
monthlystats {
date_checked
softwarename
total_posts
total_users
total_comments
}
}
Then parsed the json with this https://jqlang.org/ filter:
jq '.data.monthlystats | map(select(.total_users > 0 and (.softwarename == "lemmy" or .softwarename == "mbin" or .softwarename == "kbin" or .softwarename == "piefed"))) | group_by(.date_checked) | map( {date_checked: .[0].date_checked, total_users: ([.[] | .total_users] | add), total_posts: ([.[] | .total_posts] | add), total_comments: ([.[] | .total_comments] | add)}) | map({date_checked, posts: .total_posts/.total_users, comments: .total_comments/.total_users}) | sort_by(.date_checked) | map([.date_checked, (.posts | tostring), (.comments | tostring)]) | .[] | @csv'
(As you see I filtered for the threadiverse. I also did the same with all software, I'll put the graph for that in comments)
Then did a good old' chart
I don't know. Users' activity is on the rise and I find it nice
Merci pour l'accueil ! Je lurkais depuis un moment déjà et j'ai un poil participé avec mon compte microblogging mais ça fait un bail :)
Salut ! Je me crée enfin un compte sur le forumverse pour profiter pleinement de sa puissance :)
That's historical and can be traced back to how it was formed: some of the people were coming from the instances perspective, where a bunoh of people congregate and network, some from the individual website perspective where you can do absolutely anything and everything you want, you're home after all. So it landed somewhere in the middle: some very basic use cases were laid out, every platform did whatever they wanted and tried to fit the basic use cases in. Now we have independent platforms doing what they want and if we're nice we can, maybe, talk with others.
It's a sad state but some platforms, like emissary and bonfire, are trying to go beyond and offer the possibility for anyone to build their own interface on top. One should also defocus from mastodon and look closer at the friendica family of software which have always looked at fulfilling many usecases, so compability can be better than others