3 ms·
It's possible that it is simple to use, but the community hasn't been able to explain it yet. My attempt: Mastadon is Twitter with far fewer users. The self-hos
by javajosh 4y ago
It's possible that it is simple to use, but the community hasn't been able to explain it yet. My attempt: Mastadon is Twitter with far fewer users. The self-hosting and federation stuff is really detail to most people, much like most of email infrastructure.
- moron4hire 4y agoI don't think it's correct or useful to make an equivalence between Twitter and Mastodon. Mastodon is software. It implements the ActivityPub protocol. People run Mastodon instances of their own to connect to other ActivityPub systems. There are other ActivityPub implementations, Mastodon is just one. It's not a platform like Twitter any more than WordPress is like the NYTimes.
- alkonaut 4y agoI’m technical (as most people are on HN), but I don’t care how it works. I don’t care whether it’s a service or a protocol. I don’t care if it’s centralized or federated. What I want to know is how I use it as easily as possible. If that requires me to know the details - it failed. By “failed” in this context I mean “to be a viable Twitter alternative”. There may be other goals such as being a viable social network/protocol on a different scale or with other goals than being a Twitter competitor - but I don’t think most are interested in Mastodon for any purpose other than as a Twitter alternative.
- javajosh 4y agoIf you read the TFA you'd realize that your second paragraph is precisely what she's criticizing. It's possible that some concepts or tools can't be simplified or there's no point. Try explaining Webpack to an end-user. Such categories of things exist, in which case they are not products but components of other products. If Mastodon can't be understood simply, then it will only catch on with those who understand complexity, and be used in a product that is itself simple.
- moron4hire 4y agoIt's an intentionally obtuse criticism, and I don't think it's been made in good faith. I'm seeing all kinds of weird, gleeful hatred being thrown at a piece of software that a bunch of people are running for a variety of their own reasons. It's like being mad at WordPress because of a hateful website you found. Mastodon is not that hard to understand. It's just not Twitter. It's not meant to be a 1-to-1 replacement for Twitter, but people keep trying to compare it to Twitter and then acting out like they're all upset because they don't find everything they're looking for in the thing. If "Mastodon replace Twitter" is a thing, it will mostly be in the sense that people will be using their time differently, not that they'll be doing the same things as they do on Twitter. You're not going to "build a brand" on Mastodon. You're not going to make a name for yourself posting "dank memes". You're not going to get a chance to show off your "sick dunks" to your followers. I think it's weird that people keep calling Twitter a "public square", but if that's how they want to think of Twitter, that's not at all Mastodon. What is Twitter, actually? It's an advertising platform. It carrots people with celebrities and sticks them with promoted tweets. Along the way, some people find they can keep up with their friends, colleagues, and industry acquaintances through the thing. Mastodon is just about the last thing.