4 ms·

What happened to mastodon? We don’t just want to move from one walled garden to another.

by liontwist 2y ago

wsatb 2y ago
Quite frankly, it lacks marketing.
Timwi 2y ago
Amen! That was my first thought as well when I saw this.
kstrauser 2y ago
We’re still here, and my timeline is still packed with awesome people I love talking to.
WA 2y ago
I think Mastodon will have its place, but won’t grow much. BlueSky will grow more instead of Mastodon. Reasons: - BlueSky is mostly centralized and easier to understand. No server choice stuff - BlueSky has the better name - BlueSky has the cleaner UI
- AnthonyMouse 2y ago
  I want to disagree with the first two of those: > BlueSky is mostly centralized and easier to understand. No server choice stuff It's not supposed to be this way even though it is right now. They're intending for it to be actually fully federated. But the "server choice" stuff is a bug in the existing design of Mastodon anyway. It shouldn't matter which server you pick because you should be able to change it at any time seamlessly, e.g. by uploading a copy of your posts to any other server, where your posts are backed up to your local device by default. So then the question is, does Bluesky repeat the error when they get around to it, or does Mastodon fix it with an update, or both or neither? But it's not inherently an advantage for Bluesky, unless they get it right and Mastodon doesn't fix it. > BlueSky has the better name The old thing was called Twitter, which is the same kind of parody of itself as Mastodon. Now it's called X, which is somehow even more of a parody of itself. It turns out having a silly name doesn't stop people from using it.
  - spencerflem 2y ago
    BlueSky is also centralized in terms of search, for pragmatic reasons. You can search across every bluesky post and cannot on mastodon, for better or worse. I'm on mastadon, but its clearly harder to use, and theres way lower engagement.
    - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
      There is a difference between search being centralized (as in there is only one search provider) and just being indexed by third parties, in the same way as the whole web can be searched by both Google and Bing. The second one is clearly what you want for public posts, and could even be implemented locally for private posts (because then you don't have to index the whole internet, only the people you follow). It doesn't need to be centralized to work, and better if it isn't.
      - spencerflem 2y ago
        To be fair, that second model is what bluesky has. You can run another indexer, but unlike mastadon where you only have to deal with interactions to posts that involve your instance's members, with bluesky you have to be able to keep up with the entire firehose at once. So its cost prohibitive for all but big orgs. It does mean search (and as importantly, likes and comments) are globally consistent so there's def a trade off.
7373737373 2y ago
Yes, why use a platform not run by a pure non-profit org - and run by a guy who sold their previous one?
- rsynnott 2y ago
  FWIW, Dorsey has been yeeted.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- liontwist 2y ago
  I’m surprised to find someone who still believes “non profit” carries any weight. These are all propaganda sites. The value is the influence.
  - 7373737373 2y ago
    Bullshit, not every founder or organization is morally bankrupt. Have a look at Lichess or the Blender Foundation. (Ethical) values are an essential aspect of any organization, and at least for me, these are shining beacons of humanity.
    - liontwist 2y ago
      > not every founder or organization is morally bankrupt I didn’t say that. What I said is the word “non profit” has no bearing on it. And it may even be a negative signal, as the organization wants to appear neutral or moral.
gr__or 2y ago
not-federalized != walled-garden A walled garden implies captured user data and social graph, which is the decentralized part of Bluesky (ATProto to be precise). The difference to Mastodon (ActivityPub to be annoyingly precise again) is in funding needed to host the entire thing. With ActivityPub, you have to find recluse with a war-lord who will now own your data and handle, and spend a not-too-insignificant amount to keep up the infra (enough that instances have folded due to finances). With ATProto, one has to find a seemingly sympathetic oligarch who does NOT own your handle or your data, and has to spend an average european income on keeping up the infra. Different threat models, different game theoretical plays really
catapart 2y ago
Seems healthy to me. It's around 1/3 the size of Bsky (which is, itself, a small fraction of twitter's user count), but it is still maintaining just shy of a million DAUs, which is not that far off from Bsky's 1.2-1.5 million DAUs. Bsky has a better UX so it attracts a wider diversity of users, which can make it seems more prominent than masto, but the value of federation is interoperability. Mastodon can keep all of its users and still share its content on bsky and vice versa. It's not a zero sum for one of them to win or lose.

What happened to mastodon? We don’t just want to move from one walled garden to another.

wsatb 2y ago

Quite frankly, it lacks marketing.

Timwi 2y ago

Amen! That was my first thought as well when I saw this.

kstrauser 2y ago

We’re still here, and my timeline is still packed with awesome people I love talking to.

WA 2y ago

I think Mastodon will have its place, but won’t grow much. BlueSky will grow more instead of Mastodon. Reasons: - BlueSky is mostly centralized and easier to understand. No server choice stuff - BlueSky has the better name - BlueSky has the cleaner UI

AnthonyMouse 2y ago
I want to disagree with the first two of those: > BlueSky is mostly centralized and easier to understand. No server choice stuff It's not supposed to be this way even though it is right now. They're intending for it to be actually fully federated. But the "server choice" stuff is a bug in the existing design of Mastodon anyway. It shouldn't matter which server you pick because you should be able to change it at any time seamlessly, e.g. by uploading a copy of your posts to any other server, where your posts are backed up to your local device by default. So then the question is, does Bluesky repeat the error when they get around to it, or does Mastodon fix it with an update, or both or neither? But it's not inherently an advantage for Bluesky, unless they get it right and Mastodon doesn't fix it. > BlueSky has the better name The old thing was called Twitter, which is the same kind of parody of itself as Mastodon. Now it's called X, which is somehow even more of a parody of itself. It turns out having a silly name doesn't stop people from using it.
- spencerflem 2y ago
  BlueSky is also centralized in terms of search, for pragmatic reasons. You can search across every bluesky post and cannot on mastodon, for better or worse. I'm on mastadon, but its clearly harder to use, and theres way lower engagement.
  - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
    There is a difference between search being centralized (as in there is only one search provider) and just being indexed by third parties, in the same way as the whole web can be searched by both Google and Bing. The second one is clearly what you want for public posts, and could even be implemented locally for private posts (because then you don't have to index the whole internet, only the people you follow). It doesn't need to be centralized to work, and better if it isn't.
    - spencerflem 2y ago
      To be fair, that second model is what bluesky has. You can run another indexer, but unlike mastadon where you only have to deal with interactions to posts that involve your instance's members, with bluesky you have to be able to keep up with the entire firehose at once. So its cost prohibitive for all but big orgs. It does mean search (and as importantly, likes and comments) are globally consistent so there's def a trade off.

7373737373 2y ago

Yes, why use a platform not run by a pure non-profit org - and run by a guy who sold their previous one?

rsynnott 2y ago
FWIW, Dorsey has been yeeted.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
liontwist 2y ago
I’m surprised to find someone who still believes “non profit” carries any weight. These are all propaganda sites. The value is the influence.
- 7373737373 2y ago
  Bullshit, not every founder or organization is morally bankrupt. Have a look at Lichess or the Blender Foundation. (Ethical) values are an essential aspect of any organization, and at least for me, these are shining beacons of humanity.
  - liontwist 2y ago
    > not every founder or organization is morally bankrupt I didn’t say that. What I said is the word “non profit” has no bearing on it. And it may even be a negative signal, as the organization wants to appear neutral or moral.

gr__or 2y ago

not-federalized != walled-garden A walled garden implies captured user data and social graph, which is the decentralized part of Bluesky (ATProto to be precise). The difference to Mastodon (ActivityPub to be annoyingly precise again) is in funding needed to host the entire thing. With ActivityPub, you have to find recluse with a war-lord who will now own your data and handle, and spend a not-too-insignificant amount to keep up the infra (enough that instances have folded due to finances). With ATProto, one has to find a seemingly sympathetic oligarch who does NOT own your handle or your data, and has to spend an average european income on keeping up the infra. Different threat models, different game theoretical plays really

catapart 2y ago

Seems healthy to me. It's around 1/3 the size of Bsky (which is, itself, a small fraction of twitter's user count), but it is still maintaining just shy of a million DAUs, which is not that far off from Bsky's 1.2-1.5 million DAUs. Bsky has a better UX so it attracts a wider diversity of users, which can make it seems more prominent than masto, but the value of federation is interoperability. Mastodon can keep all of its users and still share its content on bsky and vice versa. It's not a zero sum for one of them to win or lose.