3 ms·

One major difference between twitter and mastodon is that mastodon doesn't show you popular things you didn't ask for. It doesn't try to show you stuff that you

One major difference between twitter and mastodon is that mastodon doesn't show you popular things you didn't ask for. It doesn't try to show you stuff that you'll maybe think is interesting. Mastodon is just more or less showing you what you wanted. And it is not addictive this way. It can't fuel mass viral trends and conversations. It has none of the twitter dynamics. I'm not saying that's bad, but I think it means it will never be mass market popular. It's like email vs tiktok, email can't compete with tiktok's sweet features.

noodleman 4y ago
> It can't fuel mass viral trends and conversations. How can it? Don't you have to join individual servers? If so it is by design that you can't observe or interact with anything outside of your little bubble.
- kzrdude 4y ago
  You can speak with anyone on any federated server, you don't have to hop servers on mastodon. The instances are the providers, but they participate in a big network (except the ones that are banned - i.e each instance can choose which edges in the graph it should use.)
cmrdporcupine 4y ago
Original twitter was also like this. As was Facebook, etc. They got their original user base without any of this. And then used that foundation as the basis for a giant advertising machine by rolling out "the algorithm." I think it's possible to get quite large by just offering a decent reinvented "BBS" service. It's just likely not possible... to make money.
- baby 4y ago
  I don’t think the problem is money. I think it’s losing users to people who roll out the algorithm.
  - cmrdporcupine 4y ago
    Both twitter and FB were wildly unprofitable until they made this kind of "algorithmic" shift and that shift happened in order to court the ads revenue firehose. Having worked in ad-tech some years ago, it's just... the temptation is too strong. Your whole business becomes "enhancing engagement" and all sorts of sophistry gets involved in presenting a Zuckerberg-like case about how this is "improving the world" by "making things better for users" and "connecting people" [with products or other people or whatever]. The firehose seems infinite, and it lets you grow grow grow. Even Apple, which resisted this for years and kept itself as a "consumer products" and "media" company has now fallen prey to this and is trying to divert some part of the ad-revenue stream to itself. Once you do that, it's paperclips paperclips paperclips
    - baby 4y ago
      I guess if this is true then it's more than "it's too tempting". Meta is a huuuuge business today and it wouldn't have been without being profitable. I don't think they really provided much value besides facebook (I think instagram and whatsapp are great apps, but they're replaceable), but now they definitely are with their entry in VR/AR. The Quest 2 is really something, and I can't wait to see what they'll build in the AR space.
kornhole 4y ago
Mastodon community is improving discovery features but algorithmic manipulation of feeds seems to be off limits. Maybe a user controlled feed algorithm would be accepted.

noodleman 4y ago

> It can't fuel mass viral trends and conversations. How can it? Don't you have to join individual servers? If so it is by design that you can't observe or interact with anything outside of your little bubble.

kzrdude 4y ago
You can speak with anyone on any federated server, you don't have to hop servers on mastodon. The instances are the providers, but they participate in a big network (except the ones that are banned - i.e each instance can choose which edges in the graph it should use.)

cmrdporcupine 4y ago

Original twitter was also like this. As was Facebook, etc. They got their original user base without any of this. And then used that foundation as the basis for a giant advertising machine by rolling out "the algorithm." I think it's possible to get quite large by just offering a decent reinvented "BBS" service. It's just likely not possible... to make money.

baby 4y ago
I don’t think the problem is money. I think it’s losing users to people who roll out the algorithm.
- cmrdporcupine 4y ago
  Both twitter and FB were wildly unprofitable until they made this kind of "algorithmic" shift and that shift happened in order to court the ads revenue firehose. Having worked in ad-tech some years ago, it's just... the temptation is too strong. Your whole business becomes "enhancing engagement" and all sorts of sophistry gets involved in presenting a Zuckerberg-like case about how this is "improving the world" by "making things better for users" and "connecting people" [with products or other people or whatever]. The firehose seems infinite, and it lets you grow grow grow. Even Apple, which resisted this for years and kept itself as a "consumer products" and "media" company has now fallen prey to this and is trying to divert some part of the ad-revenue stream to itself. Once you do that, it's paperclips paperclips paperclips
  - baby 4y ago
    I guess if this is true then it's more than "it's too tempting". Meta is a huuuuge business today and it wouldn't have been without being profitable. I don't think they really provided much value besides facebook (I think instagram and whatsapp are great apps, but they're replaceable), but now they definitely are with their entry in VR/AR. The Quest 2 is really something, and I can't wait to see what they'll build in the AR space.

kornhole 4y ago

Mastodon community is improving discovery features but algorithmic manipulation of feeds seems to be off limits. Maybe a user controlled feed algorithm would be accepted.