I feel like I don't explicitly state this often enough, but I want to see a future where most people are on federated social networks. Mastodon, Pleroma, Misskey, etc, instead of Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.
@Gargron no te has acostao todavía ehh maquina?
This future could be around the corner ... I wish though that at least some Mastodon instances would also be able to integrate with identi.ca and other Pump.io instances
@Gargron (they'll probably still hang mostly around two or three instances)
@Gargron I don't care so much about federated or not, but I want the advertising and investor money out of our social lives. It poisons everything, and it has thoroughly poisoned the big social networks. And the fediverse is the best available alternative at the moment.
Yup, I agree.
One tech idea is having peer-to-peer instead of servers, such as Scuttlebutt and Briar?
But yes, the bulk of the solution has to come from tougher regulation. Newspapers used to be heavily regulated to prevent monopolies and abuse of power. There should be a recognition that social media has become even more powerful than papers were.
In the mean time, I guess we just have to do the best we can with the tools available.
One concern is that social attitudes are being artificially manipulated through unregulated social media and particularly hypertargeted advertising.
So, in a way regulation and social attitudes may not be such separate issues.
Polarising people is exactly the social change I mean, it divides people from each other and makes rational discourse more difficult.
I am not an academic but my understanding is that Facebook is less than forthcoming about opening its order books to outside researchers, particularly on political topics :/
Political advertising Show more
I mean things like CA''s activities where they set up an apparently non-political "personality test" to gather data on individuals' political tendencies, then sent targeted ads to play on those tendencies.
It doesn't mean changing someone's opinion, it means steering them the way you want in order to win a vote.
Even if they solidly oppose you, you might still convince them not to vote for anyone, or perhaps to vote for a third candidate who has no chance of winning.
CA was far more than two Etonians, its parent is owned by Mercer and he continues to employ Nix et al. Bannon also worked at CA.
That article leans heavily on pro-Trump Republican sources, who (with all due respect) are hardly likely to be reliable on this topic.
If these tactics were effective, they would also be potentially illegal, and they would be crazy to shout about them from the rooftops.
Whistleblowers from CA painted a very different picture:
From what was in the FB leaks, the conventional ads are irrelevant except as a payment method.
Officially, FB doesn't sell personal data to anyone. In theory, they analyse people's data without revealing it, then match up adverts to people, which is their equivalent of adwords.
Unofficially, FB would allow companies to use known-to-be-leaky apps to obtain personal data free of charge, on the understanding that those companies would also buy conventional ads.
Also, besides ads, social media content itself has an effect on society:
In the old days there were clearly authoritative sources (physical newspapers, radio, TV) that were legally accountable and professionally run. Extremist publications were rare and difficult to find.
Nowadays journalists publish side-by-side with hate groups on the same platforms, and it's very easy to publish completely fabricated news that newspapers would never have touched.
@61 @switchingsocial @Gargron
IRC hasn't really really been federated since the Eris incident, and AFAIK walled garden XMPP doesn't federate from the very beginning, so for all intents and purposes it may not be XMPP-based at all.
So AFAIK gmail is the only example where one party in a federated network gained a dominant position.
In the first scenario, it's obvious from the beginning that the service is a walled garden, we can explain and show to the users how walled it is, and it doesn't exploit our openness.
OTOH, in the second scenario, the attacker is pretending to be one of us, hijacking our network's reputation, promising users that they can still contact the rest of the network, and then changing the rules after most of the users move in.
@switchingsocial @61 @Gargron
The reason everyone went over to Gmail was because it was better than existing email in lots of ways: far superior spam filter, nicer UI, aliases, etc. #mastodon is getting traction for a similar reason: it is better for many people's needs: no nazis, more personal feel, no ads, more focused communities, no celebs (yet) - I feel the fact that it's federated is why it's better, but people are not switching **because** it's federated.
@Gargron Advertising is poison everywhere. Advertising is encroaching on our personal and shared spaces every day, always seeking to turn friendship and trust into manipulation and lies.
I will not post a corporate hashtag, I will not share a corporate post for any kind of reward, I will not even wear clothes with a prominent brand.
Because what you are giving up when you do this is precious and irreplaceable.
@WAHa_06x36 @gargron Yes, fully agree, I also would like to have networks that aren't poisoned by advertising - but in order to have services as reliable and easy-to-use as Flickr, Twitter, Instagram (or as *meaningful* to people if you are, in example, a photographer seeking other photographers to communicate with, online) requires a bit of money. If we want to ban advertising, we should become more willing to pay for services we right now take as granted "for free". 😉
many of us do.
We contribute to the running costs of the servers.
I believe that if this model keeps working we could even reimburse the admins for their working hours and not just hosting costs.
Also there are coops etc.
@z428 @WAHa_06x36 @Gargron I don't even care that much about advertising, I just don't want the services to be 1) monolithic and immoveable, or 2) perverting the truth for the service of advertising, like hiding recent posts rather than showing things chronologically, hiding content that otherwise happened without the user's input or desire, crap like that. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely also love that the Fediverse is ad-free, but yeah.
Hypothetically, would you be okay with a social network that has a combination of No ads for You for 1.99/month, but Ads for your friends that want it for free?
From a small European company without VC money and good values.
The thinking is that even federated apps would benefit from some more money coming in to fund development.
@alexbeck Coming in to... who, exactly?
If there was several commercial instances set up like that, owned by several small companies, each company would then use that money.
The federated network could still have non-commercial instances as well.
If five small companies each run on a mixed model of ads and subscriptions, and all those companies contributes to the open source, it improves faster.
I'm thinking for profit company, but the same business model could be used by a non-profit organization.
@Gargron IT IS HAPPENING
@EmmaG I wish you could experience the benefits of my work on 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6. Waiting on the switter upgrade...
@Gargron Thank you, President! 👏
@Gargron As of today, I state you as the POTMF (President of the Mastodon federations).
@Gargron This is a laudable goal! Thank you for working towards it.
FWIW, I think this may be the root cause of much of the friction around the project.
Developing Mastodon with the aim of growth and bringing more people into the Fediverse is not the same thing as developing the "safest" social network. Those goals will be in conflict at times.
It's not my place to say one is more important than the other, but it might help defuse friction if people understand they have different priorities.
Maybe because a part of me thinks that marketing == lying, that it necessarily involves deceiving people, and getting them to use our thing (in this case: move to the Fedi) even when it's not a good choice for them.
I'd like to avoid a situation when people expect the Fedi to be something it isn't. And IIRC I've already seen some misguided people like this on the Fedi.
I hear you. That would be good.
@Gargron I want to see a future where we connect to the Fediverse from our own Domains.
I get your privacy concerns of webmentions. I is legit reasoning.
Thinking about display options and degrees of network connections
Server run by the main developers of the project It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!