6 ms·

It frustrates me that Jack seems to have genuine interest in this topic but seems to be totally averse to discussing Mastodon. It's hard to believe he's unaware

It frustrates me that Jack seems to have genuine interest in this topic but seems to be totally averse to discussing Mastodon. It's hard to believe he's unaware of Mastodon, so we have to believe he thinks it's not the solution for some reason. But how could it not be? Why doesn't he just use his big name and significant influence to throw his weight behind Twitter's most successful open protocol competitor if he really wants this? None of it makes sense to me and I wish he would speak more plainly on the matter.

stiltzkin 4y ago
Does Mastodon have measures vs bots and spam?, I think that's one of the issues they want to face for an alternative to Twitter.
- rglullis 4y ago
  Yes, it does. Mastodon heavily emphasizes its moderation features. Pleroma has some moderation controls but does something even more powerful with its MRF [0]. Lastly, if you want to have crypto/web3 to monetize the content distribution, there is Mitra [1], which is an AP-server being developed by ONE person and in less than a year has delivered more than the whole vapoware from Bluesky team has done since Jack announced it. [0]: https://docs-develop.pleroma.social/backend/configuration/mrf/ https://docs-develop.pleroma.social/backend/configuration/mr... [1]: https://mitra.social https://mitra.social
  - stiltzkin 4y ago
    Really interesting about Mitra!.
rglullis 4y ago
The problem is that he is trying to monetize the distribution of content. All his talk about decentralization is pointless, because he wants a system where there are gatekeepers, the only difference from Twitter (or Facebook/Google) is that in his view these gatekeepers should be baked into the protocol. It would be comical if it wasn't diabolical.
- PontifexMinimus 4y ago
  > he wants a system where there are gatekeepers Does he? He says "it can't have an advertising model" and that it shouldn't be centralised. > in his view these gatekeepers should be baked into the protocol I don't see how that could in practise be done, and my reading is that Dorsey either doesn't want it or doesn't think it's possible (or both).
  - loceng 4y ago
    In practice you rally all of the Bitcoin HODLers who are "desperate" and on average have "decent" losses - and want Bitcoin to become popular again, and ideally for them, become mainstream. This then incentivizes them to use only platforms and services that are integrated with Bitcoin (et al), in order to try to continue the charade that Bitcoin overall provides a net benefit, in hopes that its price, based on demand, reaches at least what they paid for it to begin with - but "hopefully 10x more!" However, it's described in part as Ponzi scheme as someone is always left holding the bag, and it will be the present moment wave who are most heavily holding the bag, who will then be more willing to rally and be a coercive group; it's like religion, or a cult, that you buy into - but where you not only have a profit motive, you're motivated to make back your losses too. The problem is they've never actually been able to compete with non-Bitcoin platforms and services - and perhaps at its foundation due to the higher cost of using Bitcoin vs. just using the internet with encryption and other security protocol; let alone story after story showing the $ billions stolen in Bitcoin; from the beginning in Bitcoin-related startup pitch decks - you'd never see a price comparison slide for Bitcoin vs. current offerings. This "army of HODLers" is however a potentially dangerous situation, as these are real people with voting power in democracies - and as I referenced above there was fairly early on an effort to "educate" politicians: how much the broader society be manipulated into adopting Bitcoin, simply through nudging of making it more normalized, all so the current HODLers can profit and pass the bag onto the next unsuspecting, misled laypeople? It only takes a single person with $ billions to $10s of billions to gain if this scheme continues, and who may already have $ billions of cash to spend say 50% of trying to manipulate to move it along strategically.
    - 4y ago
pfarrell 4y ago
He may not be clear of Twitter enough to do something like this. I’m wondering if a public action like that coukd open him up to some legal jeopardy. Just a guess.
- kevinmchugh 4y ago
  Yeah, seeing these texts where a board member discussed starting a competitor certainly raised my eyebrows
  - sneak 4y ago
    He also plainly stated that the thing he wants to start is a protocol, not a company, so it is hard to class it as “a competitor” in the traditional sense. Does gmail compete with smtp?
    - CharlesW 4y ago
      > He also plainly stated that the thing he wants to start is a protocol… Yes, but not that one. He wants a protocol he can monetize using various forms of Web3 grifts.
      - sneak 4y ago
        Your anti-cryptocurrency bias is blinding you to the fact that neither party to these conversations needs or wants any more money than they have presently. When you're a multibillionaire and you're still building new shit from scratch, you build to build. Monetary gains are a side effect.
neilalexander 4y ago
Bluesky performed a months-long discovery exercise of existing solutions and Mastodon was amongst them.
detaro 4y ago
At least the Blue Sky stuff he pushed has been very clearly on a crypto/web3 focus.
jacooper 4y ago
He said earlier that he wants to do it differently. Which I totally understand, Activity pub is an absolute failure when it comes to user discovery especially when a user is using his/her own server, which is the whole point of the entire protocol.
- rglullis 4y ago
  > Activity pub is an absolute failure when it comes to user discovery Yeah, finding out people who I want to exchange messages with is also impossible with IMAP, XMPP... "User discovery" is not part of the protocol. It's part of the application.

stiltzkin 4y ago

Does Mastodon have measures vs bots and spam?, I think that's one of the issues they want to face for an alternative to Twitter.

rglullis 4y ago
Yes, it does. Mastodon heavily emphasizes its moderation features. Pleroma has some moderation controls but does something even more powerful with its MRF [0]. Lastly, if you want to have crypto/web3 to monetize the content distribution, there is Mitra [1], which is an AP-server being developed by ONE person and in less than a year has delivered more than the whole vapoware from Bluesky team has done since Jack announced it. [0]: https://docs-develop.pleroma.social/backend/configuration/mrf/ https://docs-develop.pleroma.social/backend/configuration/mr... [1]: https://mitra.social https://mitra.social
- stiltzkin 4y ago
  Really interesting about Mitra!.

rglullis 4y ago

The problem is that he is trying to monetize the distribution of content. All his talk about decentralization is pointless, because he wants a system where there are gatekeepers, the only difference from Twitter (or Facebook/Google) is that in his view these gatekeepers should be baked into the protocol. It would be comical if it wasn't diabolical.

PontifexMinimus 4y ago
> he wants a system where there are gatekeepers Does he? He says "it can't have an advertising model" and that it shouldn't be centralised. > in his view these gatekeepers should be baked into the protocol I don't see how that could in practise be done, and my reading is that Dorsey either doesn't want it or doesn't think it's possible (or both).
- loceng 4y ago
  In practice you rally all of the Bitcoin HODLers who are "desperate" and on average have "decent" losses - and want Bitcoin to become popular again, and ideally for them, become mainstream. This then incentivizes them to use only platforms and services that are integrated with Bitcoin (et al), in order to try to continue the charade that Bitcoin overall provides a net benefit, in hopes that its price, based on demand, reaches at least what they paid for it to begin with - but "hopefully 10x more!" However, it's described in part as Ponzi scheme as someone is always left holding the bag, and it will be the present moment wave who are most heavily holding the bag, who will then be more willing to rally and be a coercive group; it's like religion, or a cult, that you buy into - but where you not only have a profit motive, you're motivated to make back your losses too. The problem is they've never actually been able to compete with non-Bitcoin platforms and services - and perhaps at its foundation due to the higher cost of using Bitcoin vs. just using the internet with encryption and other security protocol; let alone story after story showing the $ billions stolen in Bitcoin; from the beginning in Bitcoin-related startup pitch decks - you'd never see a price comparison slide for Bitcoin vs. current offerings. This "army of HODLers" is however a potentially dangerous situation, as these are real people with voting power in democracies - and as I referenced above there was fairly early on an effort to "educate" politicians: how much the broader society be manipulated into adopting Bitcoin, simply through nudging of making it more normalized, all so the current HODLers can profit and pass the bag onto the next unsuspecting, misled laypeople? It only takes a single person with $ billions to $10s of billions to gain if this scheme continues, and who may already have $ billions of cash to spend say 50% of trying to manipulate to move it along strategically.
  - 4y ago

pfarrell 4y ago

He may not be clear of Twitter enough to do something like this. I’m wondering if a public action like that coukd open him up to some legal jeopardy. Just a guess.

kevinmchugh 4y ago
Yeah, seeing these texts where a board member discussed starting a competitor certainly raised my eyebrows
- sneak 4y ago
  He also plainly stated that the thing he wants to start is a protocol, not a company, so it is hard to class it as “a competitor” in the traditional sense. Does gmail compete with smtp?
  - CharlesW 4y ago
    > He also plainly stated that the thing he wants to start is a protocol… Yes, but not that one. He wants a protocol he can monetize using various forms of Web3 grifts.
    - sneak 4y ago
      Your anti-cryptocurrency bias is blinding you to the fact that neither party to these conversations needs or wants any more money than they have presently. When you're a multibillionaire and you're still building new shit from scratch, you build to build. Monetary gains are a side effect.

neilalexander 4y ago

Bluesky performed a months-long discovery exercise of existing solutions and Mastodon was amongst them.

detaro 4y ago

At least the Blue Sky stuff he pushed has been very clearly on a crypto/web3 focus.

jacooper 4y ago

He said earlier that he wants to do it differently. Which I totally understand, Activity pub is an absolute failure when it comes to user discovery especially when a user is using his/her own server, which is the whole point of the entire protocol.

rglullis 4y ago
> Activity pub is an absolute failure when it comes to user discovery Yeah, finding out people who I want to exchange messages with is also impossible with IMAP, XMPP... "User discovery" is not part of the protocol. It's part of the application.