5 ms·

I don't really understand why anyone would use an "alternative" microblogging platform / social network that doesn't offer decentralization or federation. If yo

by aftbit 2y ago

I don't really understand why anyone would use an "alternative" microblogging platform / social network that doesn't offer decentralization or federation. If you are okay with centralized, just go to the cesspool of Twitter or X or Facebook or whatever else has the most network effects in your circle. If you want to control your data, go to something like Mastodon or Bluesky, where the offramp is self-hosting of the old version forever, even if they cease development on the system. I guess I just don't understand what problem Cohost solved that other solutions didn't solve better and cheaper.

wilsonnb3 2y ago
I had never heard of cohost until today but I would have considered using it. I don't particularly like any of the current centralized options but I also don't particularly care about federation and as such don't want to deal with the added friction that it brings.
Twisol 2y ago
> I don't really understand why anyone would use an "alternative" microblogging platform > just go to the cesspool of Cohost didn't feel like a cesspool to me. That's a pretty darn strong differentiator. There are other UX differentiators for me, but it's all subjective. Cohost didn't feel as "cramped" as the others. The others really put the focus on the "micro" in "microblogging", even if technically they (now) allow for longer-form posts. The culture just isn't there for it.
- codetrotter 2y ago
  > Cohost didn't feel like a cesspool to me. That's a pretty darn strong differentiator. Was this due to something specific they did? Or was this just like how small subreddits can/could be the best place on earth, but then soon after they reach around 10,000 subscribers the quality of the content on the subreddit quickly drops significantly. Something like the Eternal September effect: > The periodic flood of new users overwhelmed the existing culture for online forums and the ability to enforce existing norms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September
  - Twisol 2y ago
    I don't really know -- I'm a user, not an analyst. But the two things that drew me in were: 1. There's no global firehose that your posts automatically get dropped into. I'm a generally shy person, and one of my particularities is that I don't want my content (or, well, existence) to be pushed at somebody who didn't specifically ask for it. The number of social media platforms that meet this criterion is vanishingly small, because everybody and their uncle wants an Algorithm (tm). Mastodon instances also have a default instance firehose; I'm told people don't really look at that, but the fact that it's there at all makes me overthink posting, and I end up not posting at all. Instead of a global firehose, you can add free-form tags to your post that act like much, much more localized streams of posts. You don't have to use tags at all; and you can also use completely nonsense tags that are more like footnotes, in a very Tumblr style that I enjoy. 2. The UI is wider than Twitter, or Facebook, or Mastodon. It feels like it's more inviting to longer-form content, and while there's plenty of short blurbs and memes to be found, there's just a much higher proportion of blog-style content. Also, the way reposting and commenting interact is just way better IMO. If you repost something, the comments on the original post are visible above the comments on your repost, and that makes the whole chain of interactions feel more cohesive. In contrast, quote-retweeting on Twitter creates entirely separate bubbles of discussion (often at odds with each other). And on Cohost, while you can create a repost chain to make a kind of "thread" equivalent, the UI naturally discourages it in favor of just making a single long-form post.
  - rebane2001 2y ago
    On Cohost the feed is chronological, so I felt like I was seeing everything my friends were sharing, but not much else. There's no like/repost/follow counts, so engagement baiting is discouraged. It's not addicting, I can check it once a day, or once a week, and feel caught up — I didn't get the urge to keep scrolling. Oh and most importantly for me, it allows html/css in posts, which enables so much cool stuff and creativity generally reserved for personal websites.
- asddubs 2y ago
  are there any screenshots of the UI available? I tried to sign up but they don't accept any more signups
culi 2y ago
In addition to Mastodon and Bluesky, Threads now supports the ActivityPub protocol that the fediverse (incl Mastodon) is built upon. There's also been talks about eventual interop between bsky's protocol and activitypub's. For now at least a bridge exists
- wilsonnb3 2y ago
  Aren't most mastodon instances intentionally blocking federation with threads though?
  - ocdtrekkie 2y ago
    A large number of very small instances block Threads. Essentially none of the major Mastodon servers do though.
    - MichaelZuo 2y ago
      What are the major Mastodon servers?
      - ocdtrekkie 2y ago
        mastodon.social is the largest, one of the most tech/HN-crowd focused ones is hachyderm.io, universeodon.com and mstdn.social are both pretty big. I don't think any of the above block Threads.
- Ericson2314 2y ago
  > There's also been talks about eventual interop between bsky's protocol and activitypub's Got a recent link for this? I wouldn't think that would work so well.
- cesarb 2y ago
  > Threads now supports the ActivityPub protocol that the fediverse (incl Mastodon) is built upon. Given the recent issues with Twitter, my country's president started posting on an official account on both Bluesky and Threads. Knowing about that ActivityPub support from Threads, I decided to try following him from my Mastodon account, which is in a server which does not block Threads (it can follow the USA president's and vice-president's official Threads accounts just fine), but that didn't work. What I found out after a quick web search, was that this feature is only available for users from the USA, and even then, it has to be manually enabled on each Threads account.
kg 2y ago
No fediverse instance I've run across provides high-fidelity posting like Cohost and Tumblr. Out of the two, the Cohost experience was generally much nicer. I have accounts on Mastodon, Twitter and Bluesky along with the other two and Cohost was easily my preference for sharing long-form content.
coldpie 2y ago
It had a pleasant UI and I liked their moderation policies and ethical business model. I don't like Twitter or Facebook's moderation policies or business models. I don't care about de/centralization.

by aftbit 2y ago

wilsonnb3 2y ago

I had never heard of cohost until today but I would have considered using it. I don't particularly like any of the current centralized options but I also don't particularly care about federation and as such don't want to deal with the added friction that it brings.

Twisol 2y ago

> I don't really understand why anyone would use an "alternative" microblogging platform > just go to the cesspool of Cohost didn't feel like a cesspool to me. That's a pretty darn strong differentiator. There are other UX differentiators for me, but it's all subjective. Cohost didn't feel as "cramped" as the others. The others really put the focus on the "micro" in "microblogging", even if technically they (now) allow for longer-form posts. The culture just isn't there for it.

codetrotter 2y ago
> Cohost didn't feel like a cesspool to me. That's a pretty darn strong differentiator. Was this due to something specific they did? Or was this just like how small subreddits can/could be the best place on earth, but then soon after they reach around 10,000 subscribers the quality of the content on the subreddit quickly drops significantly. Something like the Eternal September effect: > The periodic flood of new users overwhelmed the existing culture for online forums and the ability to enforce existing norms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September
- Twisol 2y ago
  I don't really know -- I'm a user, not an analyst. But the two things that drew me in were: 1. There's no global firehose that your posts automatically get dropped into. I'm a generally shy person, and one of my particularities is that I don't want my content (or, well, existence) to be pushed at somebody who didn't specifically ask for it. The number of social media platforms that meet this criterion is vanishingly small, because everybody and their uncle wants an Algorithm (tm). Mastodon instances also have a default instance firehose; I'm told people don't really look at that, but the fact that it's there at all makes me overthink posting, and I end up not posting at all. Instead of a global firehose, you can add free-form tags to your post that act like much, much more localized streams of posts. You don't have to use tags at all; and you can also use completely nonsense tags that are more like footnotes, in a very Tumblr style that I enjoy. 2. The UI is wider than Twitter, or Facebook, or Mastodon. It feels like it's more inviting to longer-form content, and while there's plenty of short blurbs and memes to be found, there's just a much higher proportion of blog-style content. Also, the way reposting and commenting interact is just way better IMO. If you repost something, the comments on the original post are visible above the comments on your repost, and that makes the whole chain of interactions feel more cohesive. In contrast, quote-retweeting on Twitter creates entirely separate bubbles of discussion (often at odds with each other). And on Cohost, while you can create a repost chain to make a kind of "thread" equivalent, the UI naturally discourages it in favor of just making a single long-form post.
- rebane2001 2y ago
  On Cohost the feed is chronological, so I felt like I was seeing everything my friends were sharing, but not much else. There's no like/repost/follow counts, so engagement baiting is discouraged. It's not addicting, I can check it once a day, or once a week, and feel caught up — I didn't get the urge to keep scrolling. Oh and most importantly for me, it allows html/css in posts, which enables so much cool stuff and creativity generally reserved for personal websites.
asddubs 2y ago
are there any screenshots of the UI available? I tried to sign up but they don't accept any more signups

culi 2y ago

In addition to Mastodon and Bluesky, Threads now supports the ActivityPub protocol that the fediverse (incl Mastodon) is built upon. There's also been talks about eventual interop between bsky's protocol and activitypub's. For now at least a bridge exists

wilsonnb3 2y ago
Aren't most mastodon instances intentionally blocking federation with threads though?
- ocdtrekkie 2y ago
  A large number of very small instances block Threads. Essentially none of the major Mastodon servers do though.
  - MichaelZuo 2y ago
    What are the major Mastodon servers?
    - ocdtrekkie 2y ago
      mastodon.social is the largest, one of the most tech/HN-crowd focused ones is hachyderm.io, universeodon.com and mstdn.social are both pretty big. I don't think any of the above block Threads.
Ericson2314 2y ago
> There's also been talks about eventual interop between bsky's protocol and activitypub's Got a recent link for this? I wouldn't think that would work so well.
cesarb 2y ago
> Threads now supports the ActivityPub protocol that the fediverse (incl Mastodon) is built upon. Given the recent issues with Twitter, my country's president started posting on an official account on both Bluesky and Threads. Knowing about that ActivityPub support from Threads, I decided to try following him from my Mastodon account, which is in a server which does not block Threads (it can follow the USA president's and vice-president's official Threads accounts just fine), but that didn't work. What I found out after a quick web search, was that this feature is only available for users from the USA, and even then, it has to be manually enabled on each Threads account.

kg 2y ago

No fediverse instance I've run across provides high-fidelity posting like Cohost and Tumblr. Out of the two, the Cohost experience was generally much nicer. I have accounts on Mastodon, Twitter and Bluesky along with the other two and Cohost was easily my preference for sharing long-form content.

coldpie 2y ago

It had a pleasant UI and I liked their moderation policies and ethical business model. I don't like Twitter or Facebook's moderation policies or business models. I don't care about de/centralization.