It’s brief, around 25:15

https://youtube.com/watch?v=nf7XHR3EVHo

If you’ve been sitting on making a post about your favorite instance, this could be a good opportunity to do so.

Going by our registration applications, a lot of people are learning about the fediverse for the first time and they’re excited about the idea. I’ve really enjoyed reading through them :)

  • AidsKitty@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    2 months ago

    Cool, everybody can build these companies up so that they can launch their IPOs and be controlled by a new board of directors fresh from wall street. It will all be so different.

  • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.comEnglish
    0·
    2 months ago

    Not friendica, which seems an obvious facebook alternative.

    Also, I think they’re onto something with their fuck it approach that every social media platform would benefit from. The internet was mostly that before. Content moderation primarily serves advertisers, it was never really for the people. Old internet anarchy was chaotic fun.

    • mke@programming.devEnglish
      0·
      2 months ago

      Content moderation primarily serves advertisers

      I’m lost, here. Do you not think fighting toxicity and hate speech is a valid and important function of moderation that’s just as much or more for the sake of the people as it might be for advertisers?

      • Excrubulent@slrpnk.netEnglish
        0·
        2 months ago

        I think the rise of hate speech on centralised platforms relies very heavily on their centralised moderation and curation via algorithms.

        They have all known for a long time that their algorithms promote hate speech, but they know that curbing that behaviour negatively affects their revenue, so they don’t do it. They chase the fast buck, and they appease advertisers who have a naturally conservative bent, and that means rage bait and conventional values.

        That’s quite apart from when platform owners explicitly support that hate speech and actively suppress left leaning voices.

        I think what we have on decentralised systems where we curate/moderate for ourselves works well because most of that open hate speech is siloed, which I think is the best thing you can do with it.

      • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.comEnglish
        0·
        2 months ago

        I think that it’s just words & images on a screen that we could easily ignore like people did before, and people are indulging a grandiose conceit by thinking that moderation is that important or serves any greater cause than the interests of moderators. On social media that seems to be to serve the consumers, by which I mean the advertisers & commercial interests who pay for the attention of users. While the old internet approach of ignoring, gawking at the freakshow, or ridiculing/flaming toxic & hateful shit worked fine then resulting in many people disengaging, ragequitting, or going outside to do something better, that’s not great for advertisers protecting their brand & wanting to keep people pliant & unchallenged as they stay engaged in their uncritical filter bubbles & echo chambers.

        With old internet, safety wasn’t an internet nanny, thought police shit, and “stop burning my virgin eyes & ears”. It was an anonymous handle, not revealing personally identifying information (a/s/l?), not falling for scams & giving out payment information (unless you’re into that kinky shit). Glad to see newer social media returning to some of that.

        • Ghostbanjo1949@lemmy.mengsk.orgEnglish
          0·
          2 months ago

          I wholeheartedly agree, the only censorship should be in the individuals hands and only affects them. Aka blocking other users or content from being displayed on your own account. My moral compass does not need to be everyone’s moral compass.

        • mke@programming.devEnglish
          0·
          2 months ago

          Toxicity doesn’t “work fine,” it’s contagious and destructive. For projects, it slows progress. For communities in general, it reinforces bad behavior and pushes out newcomers, leading to more negative spaces, isolation, and stagnation, just off the top of my head. These were issues in older communities just as they are in modern ones.

          I don’t see why we should abandon moderation for your benefit, at the expense of people who care.

          • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.comEnglish
            0·
            2 months ago

            For projects, it slows progress.

            Your example of toxicity is linux maintainers resisting a newer programming language, not wanting to maintain additional bindings, and being stubborn about it? People decide whether to work & agree with each other, so what’s your definition of toxicity here? How’s moderation supposed to solve that: force people to agree & work together unwillingly? Seems rather authoritarian. People should only put words & images on a screen that someone approves? More authoritarian. And look at those imaginary problems we can solve!

            This goes back to the grandiose conceit I wrote about earlier: some people can’t get over themselves, take these words & images on a screen a bit too seriously, and feel they know better than others the right words & images to put on a screen, because of course they do. The rest of us know it’s just a bunch of self-important crap that doesn’t matter unless we make it matter, and we can ignore it or put our own words & images on a screen or go outside.

            • mke@programming.devEnglish
              0·
              2 months ago

              You streamed together a sequence of misunderstandings, fallacies and self-victimization into an incoherent pile of garbage that fails at actually responding to anything. Got it, got it, you’re god’s bravest warrior, resisting the authoritarianism of people who think others shouldn’t be forced to tolerate your immaturity whenever you act like a cunt. I’ll stop giving you attention now, so sorry.

              • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.comEnglish
                0·
                2 months ago

                Victimization is all on those like you threatened by naughty words & images who claim we need some great moderator hero to defend us against their toxicity, which apparently includes work-related disagreements.

                people who think others shouldn’t be forced to tolerate your immaturity whenever you act like a cunt

                And they’ll be objective about it, or is anything someone disagrees with instance of immaturity & someone acting like a cunt? Do we need the noble internet police to swoop in and protect us against your words & images? They’re here, yet somehow the world isn’t crumbling.

    • qaz@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      2 months ago

      Lemmy has also taken over advertiser focused moderation patterns. A great example is NSFW. What is NSFW exactly? Not safe for work? Why is only that relevant?
      NSFW is just used to mark advertiser unfriendly content. Why else group nakedness, violence, sexual content, and death in the same category?
      It’s way too vague to be useful, you have no idea if you’re going to see a nipple or a murder.

      Content warnings like on Mastodon are better, but don’t provide a way to reliably filter out categories. I personally think it would be way better to have specific nested tags for certain types of material.

      • commander@lemmings.worldEnglish
        0·
        2 months ago

        Are you new to the internet? NSFW literally means what it says: it’s content that would not be safe for you to be viewing at work.

        Advertising has nothing to do with it, which is why you still get ads on NSFW boards on 4chan; they’re just NSFW ads.

      • MortUS@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        2 months ago

        Imagine traveling down a liminal space of tubes and the only signs are nondescript TLDs.

  • legolas@fedit.plEnglish
    0·
    2 months ago

    It’s crazy how the wind changed. Does anyone remeber the almost exact same thing 4 years ago, when people on the right side of political spectrum shared alternatives to big tech from their point ov view? GAB.COM, PARLER, BRAVE, DUCKDUCKGO etc

    XD

    • misk@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      0·
      2 months ago

      In both cases it was primarily performative for Americans but this time there will be considerable chunk of Europeans who will be looking to leave big tech for services in non-hostile countries.

      • FundMECFS@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
        0·
        2 months ago

        It’s not explicitly rightwing.

        A couple years ago Musk was recommending Signal.

        It’s just an example of right wing people recommending alternatives.

      • grue@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        2 months ago

        Brave’s business model is a crypto scam wrapped in a protection racket. It man-in-the-middles the site’s ads, replacing them with Brave’s own, then holds the revenue hostage unless the site gives legitimacy to Brave’s crypto by accepting it as payment.

        For comparison, “normal” ad-blocking consists of an end-user exercising his property right to control the operation of his own computer by programming it not to display the ads at all.

        Hopefully you can see how the thing Brave does is very different, and much more ethically fraught.

  • Rhoeri@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    2 months ago

    I’m sure he’s going to be facing lawsuits from Краснов and Wormtongue any day now.

    • dan1101@lemm.eeEnglish
      0·
      2 months ago

      I signed up today. I never liked Twitter but I will give it a try. Steam (PC gaming platform) is a member so that’s a plus for me.

    • unknown1234_5@kbin.earth
      0·
      2 months ago

      mastodon is already the next twitter, bluesky is just a direct copy of it with nothing keeping it from going the same way. mastodon is open source (can’t be corpoed), federated (can talk to other platforms/instances so being on a small one doesn’t hurt anything), and most importantly, uses a protocol that doesn’t make self-hosting impossible due to storage requirements.

    • commander@lemmings.worldEnglish
      0·
      2 months ago

      Why bluesky instead of mastodon? It’s like saying lemmy.world is going to replace reddit instead of the Lemmy platform.

      Are you just commenting how the people who use something like twitter are eager to be herded like sheep into the next walled garden?

      Are you part of the bluesky viral marketing campaign to make it artificially seem like it’s “already won”?

      • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        0·
        2 months ago

        Why bluesky instead of mastodon?

        Because there is only so much oxygen in the room, and corporate ventures like Bluesky seem to come into really exciting DIY community spaces that are creating amazing things and pull the oxygen out of the room while never quite delivering on what they are promising… or seeming to promise… and in the mean time the projects that originally created the innovative energy in the space are lost in the noise.

        I mean… see basically the entire early history of the commercialization of personal computers for endless repetitions of this pattern.

        Remember we are not the customers of corporate social media companies, we are the raw husks they extract value from through surveillance capitalism and ads/paid content.

      • Uri@infosec.pubEnglish
        0·
        2 months ago

        When I said bluesky will be the next Twitter did I said Twitter is a good place. Twitter is now bullshit.

      • Dojan@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        2 months ago

        I’m wondering this too People are hyped about bluesky but it is the same corpo bullshit that Twitter is. I mean it is literally by the same dude. Why fold?,

        • JacksonLamb@lemmy.worldEnglish
          0·
          2 months ago

          Bizarre that you and that other guy thought “will become the next Twitter” was some sort of praise. It’s not.

          • Dojan@lemmy.worldEnglish
            0·
            2 months ago

            I think it’s more bizarre that you think “same corpo bullshit that Twitter is” is some kind of praise.

            • JacksonLamb@lemmy.worldEnglish
              0·
              2 months ago

              If you don’t agree with the person above you, maybe don’t start your comment with

              I’m wondering this too.

              Accusing people of being shills for commenting that bluesky is going to become (shitty) like twitter is out of pocket.

        • redacted2@lemmy.worldEnglish
          0·
          2 months ago

          Didnt Dorsey already walk from it and gave the reason that it is headed the same way twitter is. Bluesky is being pushed by capitalists because it is a for profit company just like twitter and facebook.

    • rayyy@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      2 months ago

      Exactly! All a person has to do is to look around - the right buys up all popular media platforms and converts them to propaganda outlets.

  • shortrounddev@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    2 months ago

    Would like to get my family on Signal. I deleted my facebook account and now we use various other chat apps that I don’t quite like

    • Pika@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      0·
      2 months ago

      I’ve never understood why people just can’t send messages through text. Like why do they need a special app in order to do it.

      I don’t use Facebook myself and my family members just started texting me and honestly it’s so much easier

      Don’t get me wrong, I definitely think that signal is more secure. I just don’t understand why people just install another app in order to communicate with their family, just let them know you’re available through text

      edit: I want to clarify that I may not have been clear/missed saying in this post, I’m not saying people shouldn’t(if people would change I would love it), I’m saying I don’t understand why people do knowing that your family members aren’t going to care and are just going to text you anyway as has been my experience

      • Alloi@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        2 months ago

        i imagine its because text messages are saved by your provider and can be used or accessed by law enforcement even if deleted. but that may or may not be an issue for most people swapping recipes or talking to their family about normal every day stuff.

        • Pika@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          0·
          2 months ago

          Yeah I believe that, the people I have on my signal are generally ones that are worried that the cops are going to track them or something. I fully agree that privacy is important, unfortunately my family and the general public care is significantly less

      • JustARegularNerd@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        2 months ago

        SMS is incredibly antiquated as soon as you want to do anything multimedia, or heck sending an SMS longer than 144 characters.

        My mother received a video over SMS the other day and it legitimately looked like it was filmed on a Nokia 6310.

        I’ve encouraged my family to use Signal to replace SMS and it functions really well as an SMS upgrade. It’s more secure, private, supports sending decent quality multimedia, the interface is simplistic, it has formatting, does video calls well, and you can send a long message without it being a hacked together string of 5 messages.

        From both a security and usability perspective, it wins out on SMS in my opinion.

        Edit: there’s also the nightmare of group chats with SMS. I hate when extended family try to use it

        • Pika@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          0·
          2 months ago

          Don’t get me wrong, I agree with everything you’ve said here.

          SMS and MMS are an antique technology, I can’t argue that. But it’s not going to change the fact that my family is not going to install another messaging app on their device in order to talk to me. They’re going to text me or call me anyway so therefore there’s no point, and hopefully with the improvements on the RCS standard the issues that have occurred with SMS and MMS will go away.

          As is I have four different messaging apps on my phone ignoring my messages app, signal (which I can count on one hand the amount of my friends that have an account), Discord which the majority of my online friends are on, and less than a handful of my relatives are on. Telegram which I mostly have for artists, and Revolt which I really should uninstall but like I really want that project to go somewhere.

          My family is almost exclusively on Facebook messenger, I do not use Facebook Messenger, sms/rcs is the only system that my relatives and I both have, and they’re not about to install another app, to talk to one person which would be me.

          So yes I fully agree with everything you’ve stated there, 100%. But it’s a perfect example of how on paper it sounds amazing but in practice it doesn’t work. At the end of the day my family is going to text me regardless if I tell them that I’m on Signal, because I’m not on Facebook and they already have SMS on their phone

          • fuck_u_spez_in_particular@lemmy.worldEnglish
            0·
            2 months ago

            Oh in practice it works quite well for me, basically all my friends and family use Signal now. You can slightly push them towards that, explain the obvious pros, it’s simple to install, so it’s just a small matter of convincing. I only rarely use WhatsApp for some external groups.

            • Pika@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              0·
              2 months ago

              Whatsapp isn’t really a thing in my area but man is Facebook messenger is, but yeah nice that you were able, I didn’t have much luck with my relatives to switch over to signal or Discord back when it took off, they just sort of stayed on Facebook.

              My online friend group had a higher adoption rate for discord from skype at first but, that might just be because I refused to give them my phone number so they couldn’t access me elsewhere.

              Really the only group that I had really have an interest in other alternatives, was my cybersecurity class in college, but even they tended to straight towards Discord more than signal (which is insane to me)

      • shortrounddev@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        2 months ago

        SMS is a pain in the ass. iOS users aren’t using SMS, they’re using a proprietary system which is inaccessible to android users. Occasionally a 1-on-1 text works with RCS but it’s janky

        • Pika@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          0·
          2 months ago

          IOS has had native RCS since they launched IOS 18 back in like August/September-ish, I haven’t had much issue with support from IOS to Android RCS side, but I’m not sure what my family in Florida use for their iphones, I expect older models might struggle. I have however had issues with communicating with my mom, but I believe it’s because she doesn’t understand that when she has RCS enabled, and she turns off data, it wants to try using RCS, then fails, and then falls-back to SMS, which for some reason Samsung Messages struggles with.

          Personally speaking though, my S20 hasen’t had any issues with RCS period, its always been other devices not actually sending proceeding to error and then the person not noticing it so therefore not retrying