Nope but the general use is going to be overwhelmed by the idea of instances.
I’m a techie and I had to spend a good amount of time reading about how it all works before I felt comfortable joining here. So the average user would probably just give up and use something else.
The email comparison is definitely the best one I’ve seen so far but I still don’t think it’ll stick with people.
I’m pretty dumb when it comes to digital architecture/infrastructure and I didn’t really have an issue with Lemmy/Kbin, I think it comes down a lot to how you explain it.
Maybe ISPs is an okay comparison? Most of us are on different ISPs but we access the same internet.
Sciences, sports, politics, news and many more all rely on twitter as a platform that works or used to. There really is a case for a internationally ran system for this. Twitter has such a high value that removing it will have a negative impact. Something that has become so fundamental to getting a message across needs to be ran in a not for profit fashion, rather than see it go to the wall because there is not enough return in it.
Twitter is international. It will not have the same appeal with segregation by nationality.
The Dutch Government has a much higher trust rating than ours has. Can you imagine the same uptake if the UK did likewise. I certainly would have zero trust with the current people in power.
You’re on feddit.uk and I’m on kbin.social and we’re both still here, commenting on a lemmy.world thread. Unless you’re browsing by local (ie, only posts that are made on your local instance), or your instance is very defederation-happy, it doesn’t have to mean much.
That’s okay, it can be a little hard to wrap your head around!
What helped me is thinking of it like email: I can use a Gmail account, you can use a Hotmail account, and someone else can use their own private mail server. We all go to different websites/programs/apps to access our emails, and those programs might have different features, layouts, etc, but we can all still email each other. They’re all federated with each other. And if you start getting emails from marketing@spamcentral.com, promotions@spamcentral.com, etc, you can block the entire spamcentral.com email domain - ie, defederate from it.
The fediverse works very similarly. We can all use different websites with different layouts and a few different features, but all of them can communicate with each other and show common content because they’re federated with each other.
There’s a big benefit to this: no single company can control the fediverse. If your instance - feddit.uk - has to shut down, or it turns out to be run by nazis, or they start trying to charge users vast amounts of money to use the instance, or make some other move you don’t like, you can just make an account on another instance and continue to use the rest of the fediverse. Maybe a few communities that were hosted on your previous instance will become inaccessible, but the larger fediverse will still be available.
It could be the same for news companies - you’d know that “@krishnangm@channel4.com” is the real guy, because the domain name is owned by Channel 4, and verified by HTTPS.
It could be the same for news companies - you’d know that “@krishnangm@channel4.com” is the real guy, because the domain name is owned by Channel 4, and verified by HTTPS.
This!
This is how Mastodon (and Lemmy, etc.) is supposed to work. The BBC should have their own instance with accounts for every programme, presenter, news area, weather area, genre, etc. B&Q should have their own instance with an account for each store, for trades people, for (categories of) offers, etc. Sports teams/leagues should have their own instance with accounts for each team, players, coaches, etc.
Then I can join any instance (or start my own) and pick local BBC news and weather, gardening offers at B&Q, etc. and you can pick anything you want.
The beauty is that the BBC controls the BBC instance, B&Q controls the B&Q instance, etc. I can even control my instance. There isn’t one company in control. They aren’t giving out blue ticks or letting bots post misinformation. When an account/instance becomes untrustworthy you can mute/block/defederate.
The biggest failing to me is that you can’t click follow on one instance and have it follow on your instance. But it’s a limitation of websites, they’d need something like how advertisers track you across websites with JavaScript. It would have to be centralised.
Mastodon isn’t ready yet but it could be. Honestly, Lemmy still needs time to develop too.
It’s early days and we should be open to new ways of doing things. Dogmatically sticking with the initial idea of what these platforms look like will only ensure their demise.
Personally, I think that accounts and communities on the Fediverse should just be federated. That way, platforms like Lemmy essentially act as a p2p network. No more needing to pick a server, no concern over having someone steal your username on another instance, and no more overcrowding on popular instances. You can just get put on a server that has space for you (or run your own), and control what you see and don’t see without.
The problem is: ditch it and go where?
There isn’t a place yet that has unified all public announcements like twitter does.
Threads is in a good place for that, but it’s been a week. And it’s Facebook 🤮
Mastodon, why not, but the mess that are instances isn’t helping newcomers feel comfortable on there.
What do you mean by this? Do instances on Mastodon work differently?
Nope but the general use is going to be overwhelmed by the idea of instances.
I’m a techie and I had to spend a good amount of time reading about how it all works before I felt comfortable joining here. So the average user would probably just give up and use something else.
The email comparison is definitely the best one I’ve seen so far but I still don’t think it’ll stick with people.
I’m pretty dumb when it comes to digital architecture/infrastructure and I didn’t really have an issue with Lemmy/Kbin, I think it comes down a lot to how you explain it.
Maybe ISPs is an okay comparison? Most of us are on different ISPs but we access the same internet.
It’s probably more productive to just ignore the technical details. Half the country seems to believe they’re buying “wi-fi” nowadays.
Just stick with “try Mastodon” or “try Lemmy” and let the non-technical folk build whatever mental model suits them best.
deleted by creator
Sciences, sports, politics, news and many more all rely on twitter as a platform that works or used to. There really is a case for a internationally ran system for this. Twitter has such a high value that removing it will have a negative impact. Something that has become so fundamental to getting a message across needs to be ran in a not for profit fashion, rather than see it go to the wall because there is not enough return in it.
The Dutch government have already started their own Mastodon
Twitter is international. It will not have the same appeal with segregation by nationality.
The Dutch Government has a much higher trust rating than ours has. Can you imagine the same uptake if the UK did likewise. I certainly would have zero trust with the current people in power.
Just imagine the cringy name they’d come up with… BritTwit or something.
That’s gross, I bet you’re right
If it was the instance where people could follow NHS, public health, local authoritty and national updates, I think it could fly.
We already have a decent .gov.uk information site.
Because organisations with websites never use Twitter
This is Mastodon, there is no segregation. This is just where they’re posting their updates, you can still read them from your own Mastodon instance.
If is it ran by a nationality then it will have segregation. National prejudice is very prevalent.
You’re on feddit.uk and I’m on kbin.social and we’re both still here, commenting on a lemmy.world thread. Unless you’re browsing by local (ie, only posts that are made on your local instance), or your instance is very defederation-happy, it doesn’t have to mean much.
Then I have to apologise for my ignorance. Reddit refugee here. I obviously do not understand how this works yet.
That’s okay, it can be a little hard to wrap your head around!
What helped me is thinking of it like email: I can use a Gmail account, you can use a Hotmail account, and someone else can use their own private mail server. We all go to different websites/programs/apps to access our emails, and those programs might have different features, layouts, etc, but we can all still email each other. They’re all federated with each other. And if you start getting emails from marketing@spamcentral.com, promotions@spamcentral.com, etc, you can block the entire spamcentral.com email domain - ie, defederate from it.
The fediverse works very similarly. We can all use different websites with different layouts and a few different features, but all of them can communicate with each other and show common content because they’re federated with each other.
There’s a big benefit to this: no single company can control the fediverse. If your instance - feddit.uk - has to shut down, or it turns out to be run by nazis, or they start trying to charge users vast amounts of money to use the instance, or make some other move you don’t like, you can just make an account on another instance and continue to use the rest of the fediverse. Maybe a few communities that were hosted on your previous instance will become inaccessible, but the larger fediverse will still be available.
Umm, when I comment on Mastodon post, I rarely have any idea what instance they are on
The actual trust in the government isn’t the issue, but having their own Mastodon instance would mean that you know this message came from this government. You can verify it with normal HTTPS, rather than just trusting who Twitter gives the blue checkmark to (anyone remember when the Conservative party changed their Twitter name to Fact Check UK and were able to keep their blue check?)
It could be the same for news companies - you’d know that “@krishnangm@channel4.com” is the real guy, because the domain name is owned by Channel 4, and verified by HTTPS.
This!
This is how Mastodon (and Lemmy, etc.) is supposed to work. The BBC should have their own instance with accounts for every programme, presenter, news area, weather area, genre, etc. B&Q should have their own instance with an account for each store, for trades people, for (categories of) offers, etc. Sports teams/leagues should have their own instance with accounts for each team, players, coaches, etc.
Then I can join any instance (or start my own) and pick local BBC news and weather, gardening offers at B&Q, etc. and you can pick anything you want.
The beauty is that the BBC controls the BBC instance, B&Q controls the B&Q instance, etc. I can even control my instance. There isn’t one company in control. They aren’t giving out blue ticks or letting bots post misinformation. When an account/instance becomes untrustworthy you can mute/block/defederate.
The biggest failing to me is that you can’t click follow on one instance and have it follow on your instance. But it’s a limitation of websites, they’d need something like how advertisers track you across websites with JavaScript. It would have to be centralised.
So did the municipality of Amsterdam.
Mastodon isn’t ready yet but it could be. Honestly, Lemmy still needs time to develop too.
It’s early days and we should be open to new ways of doing things. Dogmatically sticking with the initial idea of what these platforms look like will only ensure their demise.
Personally, I think that accounts and communities on the Fediverse should just be federated. That way, platforms like Lemmy essentially act as a p2p network. No more needing to pick a server, no concern over having someone steal your username on another instance, and no more overcrowding on popular instances. You can just get put on a server that has space for you (or run your own), and control what you see and don’t see without.
Seems like a few are already on Mastodon