So I'm stuck on a phone, you'll have to forgive my lack of quotes since you actually have nice formating!

This is a purely tautological issue, and a product of my pisspoor audiencing. I mentioned ethos and pointed out governance is often bad at implementation, but I don't think that's collated well.

So it might help to understand that your references to socialist are looking at the business end of building government of a historians philosophy. Which is to say, a little removed from the ethos.

My chief bone to pick is socialist governance rarely if ever in modern parlance acknowledges what the social is in direct response to. But the much better example here is the most profound socialist institution in all of the United States, your local public library.

So just to back up, Marx's contention was following capital interests throughout history, and specifically the Habsburg era, was a better indicator for why anything happened than any great man in the time. After all every great man has many powerful (or wealthy) men in his camp. And the Habsburgs were generally the wealthiest, even if their name wasn't on a ton of letterhead.

The socialism/ist ethos says why not run things to put people over capital interests. Most of what comes next in various local histories tries to figure that out, lots of which I wish I knew a lot less about.

But, to answer the question on the spot about why lemmygrad and exploding heads, common purpose. Both acknowledges having a corporate 3rd party is bad for conversation and is willing to remove the incentive from the platform and leave moderation for how much to put up from the users. But we're only talking about the platform, they don't need common reasons for it.

It's a cause (expression) at the expense of a business model, which in any sense is 'seizure of the means of production'. Which is all I'm pointing to, solidarity around a goal, or many goals, achieved with the same work. Now if you're talking about fediverse architecture we get a little more wonky, I made a long comment about how activitypub on Lemmy looks like pre Bolshevik soviets in actual structure that I stand by, but the point is the instances are flat using the same protocols.

Likewise I think if Linux meets your needs you're in solidarity with a similar if stalled project. The difference is Microsoft and Apple aren't going to tip over, reddit and Twitter aren't profitable before they had to complete with a free product, which you're helping make better.

As someone whose not in any position to do the work and just looks on: I am absolutely not trying to steal your agency, please do not stop because of me! Part of being the dope that studies how people organize is that I'm going to use words like politics and government rest of everybody, but these words are really about how we decide and how we organize at their roots.

I will say part of the dirty secret in socialist thinking is not to divorce the interest you have. The 'find solidarity' part of me would point out by keeping these projects in use and alive you make it a possibility for someone else interested later to also contribute or use it. Which in turn could be their own on ramp into future success. If you think something you're involved with should continue on without you, well... Why?

I'm generally cagey when it comes to putting myself on any political map for reasons that are probably immediately obvious from my profile. But I come from the land of Locke and Mill and would probably still agree the government that governs best governs least as a general purpose maxim, even if the caveats get longer every year.

What wrapped me around the donut hole was noticing Trotsky and Jefferson both had a real axe to grind on entrenchment, and finally sitting down to read Kropotkin and Bakunin. We don't have anything similar I ever found in the western canon.

I don't find an ism that rings especially true at all, but I know a decent cause when I see one.

I've seen the cubs win the pennant and gwar talk to/about Terri Gross. Expecting horsemen any minute for the checklist.

The reality is you already know there are people to do much of that job. A local ran a BBS for a town of 15k where I lived growing up. The moderators at Reddit were never paid, but they did it.

Point taken they whether they will do it here, but I think the descent from ubiquity to hobbyism again might do social media some good.

I've been through the collapse of the last vestiges of both Usenet and independent message boards, so I'm familiar with the perils of funding, and the deceptive costs of free. But wikipedia lives, hell even headfi still lives, there is a place within any market to be carried by it's enthusiastic.

I think you misunderstood socialism if centralized control was what you took from it. The are both centralized and decentralized varieties, the operation is in common good (or purpose). Most of the organizing principles at a microlevel you can find in non profits, co-ops etc, none of which demand any market conditions at all. Governments maintaining socialist claims often muck this up.

The phrase "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" is definitely in line with the philosophy at play. There's not a lot of profit motive to be found. It didn't even have to be divorced from self interest since we all want a better platform.

I can respect a view that software is not politics, but the intentions to it are certainly wrapped in expression. Here the primary controllers were corporations of your bits and they are put sociocratically back in your hands like it or not.

But importantly you can't take your ball and go home. What you contribute here lives in a zillion caches.

Edit: 'r'

Then they'll certainly have a lot more centralized control in mind than I would. But I've been too too many punk concerts and heard poser, and seen too many misplaced lobs of entryism to dismiss anyone behind a pejorative. Especially while the free speech instances are running the same software right along with beehaw.

And more importantly some people can be smart at one thing and dumb elsewhere, just look at Ben Carson.

So in reverse order:

The fediverse to me will always be an expanding niche, I don't think the network effect social growth works without cash. If your looking to measure by quality of dialogue instead of growth I think this presents the best option. There's plenty of economic benefit beyond ad sales from good discourse.

Instead you're looking a million AOL install disk moments until ubiquity, if it doesn't fall apart first.

Instances shutting down is actually markedly like the way famine, war or anything else beyond my control as your average user would have pushed us to other reps. You can pick up and move, but how much of your stuff? Open question. Long term it should be feasible for your own instance to fire up, fetch messages and close again, so in theory you could keep all of it.

Now hardest: scale and cost, which I'd really contend are the same problem. If you look at how such systems are introduced you find advocates for vanguard, reps, workers tribunals and nothing quite ever sticks without some lingering problems. And the reality is the web of our modern universe isn't going to independently operate with anything.

I don't think anything but a charitable model gets it off the ground, the same way I don't think the Internet is a thing without the crazy good folks running BBS boards. But it should be institutional as broadly as possible if you want long term success and trust in platform.

I think perhaps you may be confusing nobody to assert ownership of the bits, with the supposition that there is no cost on delivery.

Sure! And I'm sorry in advance for the book, I'm literally around here studying this thing for this reason.

So it might help to understand Soviet as a pre Bolshevik term more resembling 'council' than a unitary block like a nation.

In the fediverse this is instances, they stand up, enroll users and give them voices. And if you graph a lot of the ethos it's 1:1 from the ground up. For instance, you might say your posts here, once contributed are owned by everyone. You might also notice those with knowledge about the platform are maybe operating as a vanguard, you pick top or bottom (users and posts, or instances and software).

Historically part of the problem with distributed systems of independent operating electors is how they're vulnerable either to local tribalism, warlordism, and a need for some degree of functional central control of core ethos.

The pile of 'free market' people mad at the phone company evolved into the modern Internet without a model, just chaos and genius. If the next wave is reactionary communists, we're looking at something very different, but I'm not convinced it won't mutate.

if this is communism the platform: I'm genuinely curious what crowd sourced central planning offers. The people who have studied that system, and it's problems, are the ones in who have started the project. And they started with 'to each for each' as it's core principle, but it's easy to fork any foss project.

Part of what you learn when you start to read lefty philosophy is that they are (by volume and diversity), their own biggest critics. So there is going to be a plethora of times where we figure out of this is going to go pear shaped, and a ton of good or bad lessons that could come out of the canon.

Ole Brent is going to find the terms of entry a lot less favorable.

The fediverse in general is the literal manifest of the means of production owned by the producers. Every denizen can see just about every post.

You would be hard pressed to not find the socialist ethos at play anywhere on the fediverse, not just Lemmy. And really that's part of what gets hashed out here by broader adoption is just how ground level that gets.

The weird part is that whatever they think of dictators, they would know the model, and that gives me a bizarre amount of trust.

It'll get more support with some time. For now it's a nice browser to keep separate for not polluting what you doing mind putting out in public. I've had a lot more smooth experiences with PWAs I load through the ddg browser.

Actually one area I think it's got an immediate edge on firefox while the wild wild fediverse sorts out is just how many fewer attack vectors it's presenting with the pared back features.

Important to note there are options.

I've been relatively pleased with the duckduckgo mobile browser. There are a reasonable amount of chromium forks that aim for privacy oriented browsing as well, although I don't have a specific one to endorse.

I guess in defense of Mozilla: it isn't really playing a different game in the browser space, they're just trying to mitigate some of the toxicity of ad revenue as a foundation. They're still a non profit hiring from the same pool as the tech industry money printing machine.

There's still a limited pool of support they have to pull from, and I like it better with them around so the big 3 don't have a total monopoly on browser architecture.

That said it's maybe the best example the model is flawed at the jump.

Thank you!

I'm not immersed enough in the specific code to load images and would like to know as well, but I can attest it's definitely a problem in email architecture. @dessalines@lemmy.ml is probably the party you want if you want first hand info.

Also a stellar example of why I wish we could actually work together a little more. The ideological opt out of raddles software shows there are indeed legitimate concerns on platform privacy, but rather than work to harden it we're behind walls hucking pejoratives. Hundreds of years of team red vs team black, and I am exhausted with it.

Well this is the most dystopian thing I've seen today. The RFK article alone is a single right leaning source quoted twice and does 0 analysis on any claim.

If you fundamentally believe quoting NBC and the NY post is useful as 'both sides', I think you're a shame to your name, or beyond sheltered.

I'm not even endorsing it, but if you want at least a veneer of lefty opinions start with Jacobin, they're the ideological opposite of Fox news if there is one. And even on the worst day the content is better sourced.

Quoting fox news and NPR is useful if you have something to add, or analyze, not scrape and then provide no direct quotes.

You want an actually useful AI project? Take every direct word from public speeches and fact check it from public/govt DBs.

Drops in a bucket.

The sad reality is your average tax cheat will fight tooth and nail for every penny. Because even if right up to 99.9% is clawed bank, it's all profit. Somehow it's still hard to sell the right on having refs powerful enough to police the game.

Edit: stray word

I've checked the frontpage from time to time just to monitor what's changing, but I have yet to log in.

I mean I didn't graduate with a lit degree and spent my career in IT so I guess you can take a cross disciplinary endorsement. I was just a nerd.

His writing and timing are impeccable if you see it live, which is kind of lost on the page.

I found the histories worth reading because he's editorializing history in his time. You have to remember his audience was us plebs, so we get the gossip instead of the record. You know too many times in history the hot gossip got covered by... literally Shakespeare?

The fact that he's to the English language what the Beatles are to rock music feels eternally relevant too.

Short memories and sorry attention spans.

The amount of effort Randi put into debunking and cleaning up Geller's mess made him a personal hero. He'd probably sigh and understand, but he should be rolling in his grave.

I didn't know Segal's byline from Adam's before today, but he made a list.

My, if it isn't the consequences of his own actions come to find Elmo again.

Wow, I didn't think they'd implement anything more cancerous than various site preferred paywalling. This reeks of needing some good numbers to blow out headed into the IPO.

If it's this bad already, get ready for a circus.

I used Feedly before defaulting to reddit as sites slowly collapsed RSS functionally.

Curious to know as well, but most of the time I see a couple sites mentioned that I haven't been impressed with their ability to sift the trade mags and studies I was in it for.

The costs to push data are fairly trivial at the moment. Where peertube will struggle due to technical barriers (mostly just storage/duplication), text and images are just not that taxing.

Let me assure you whole it sorts itself there's no shortage of people throughout the history of new cool things who want to host and play with them. We're probably headed to maintain those through foundations/donations.

The cool part is just like email you shouldn't have to be permanently synchronized, meaning you could run an instance you collect like an email client at near 0 cost to anyone.

Good to see Streisand in full Effect!

You are correct on the initial model, and I wasn't really clear.

I think there's been a proliferation of the ledger beyond what the original design spec accounted for (exchanges) and it's going to require an amount of horsepower to move currency at an escalating level, while also scalping more on the moves of that currency.

It's easy to imagine a universe it's the large holders financing the machines to avoid total collapse and propping up the ledger. What's not is how parity comes to pass.

It's a distilled version of 'the wisdom of the crowds'. With all the dog piling that comes with reactions to things that are pointed at the wrong audience. There's generally some people with baggage in there somewhere who will take issue, and you get downvoted.

However, what's always interesting about these platforms is where good ideas rise, where they come from, and how controversial they are, all of which you lose with the twitter/mastodon architecture.

It may be easier to find your crowd, but how useful is that to you depends on what you use your online presence for.

It's anyone's guess. The hanging question to me had been where the horsepower to even maintain the ledger comes from when it's all mined.

When the barrier to entry is technical in nature you get a selection of the competent in that space as your representation. It's not perfect, but it beats zuck, musk and Huffman.

If we didn't live in a universe of an obviously (over)reactionary electorate this might be the ideal.

The problem is consensus building takes time, as long as political wins are narrow you're reinforcing the outage cycle.

More importantly the issue was tracked and resolved publicly.

The issue of trust in corporate spaces gets used to bury these things, this is a good model on how to restore it in the open.

I think some of that devolution going to be inevitable or you're going to face charges of censorship from some corners, which is just it's own cycle of rage. The network gets bigger, people click what they click and the aggregate of what our animal brains react to has a lot to be angry about.

What I worry most about is the acceleration of that cycle because we gradually gravitate towards instances with our preferred moderation or slant, which I can already see happening anyway.

I guess, at best, that It might be a cure with some side effects because it's necessarily going to play with in/out crowd dynamics.

If this is at an instance level... Fine? As long as it's visible.

I'd worry you're promoting some amount of information siloing if the current general purpose instance structure doesn't hold though.

I've got 2, largely out of curiosity for what defederation meant as far as user perspective.

When exporting comes online I'll likely make an effort to spin up an instance if it's still feasible... So there will be a 3rd cake?On the positive side I don't think you're going to find many people wanting to sock puppet mild takes and noise rock.

Probably true. it's the agencies who are desperate and likely to be looking to chatGPT to outsource ad copy who are going to be looking to capitalize.

No community is really above being targeted, because the good campaigns done by people in the niche tend to be indistinguishable from good posts.

This is near inevitable if this platform takes off.

Advertisers gonna advertise.

From a lifetime of small message boards It's easier to drive engagement in smaller groups. If there's less overall exhaustion with the basics in any niche, splitting the new members is a good way to keep differentiated material. Also growing communities can end up boxing out their regulars. It might be hard to get started, but the small communities tend to be resilient at some point, they just migrate service to service.

Most of the people who moved here were especially motivated to overcome the barriers to entry to, so I'm not sure the numbers still hold.

One can hope, even as far back as Usenet the overall general self interest is always a pile-driver to the platform.

I think we'll all be around to find out. Whether they end up federated with everyone else is up for debate, but the products still follow the eyeballs.

Advertisers especially are going to note how high engagement is compared to the other platforms, the rest will take care of itself eventually.

I was able to get everywhere til I bumped into a nsfw redirect. I'm not sure there was synchronized expiry, but I cant imagine the incentive to work to hard winding down.

Isn't the key operating word here business?

With no advertising on the line and no operations currently in place operating at anything but a loss there isn't a commercial interest at stake.

Understandable, and yet if nobody contributes upvotes out of the same concern you end up with nothing standing out in your feed to come comment on. Kind of circular.

On the other hand having an upvote actually attached to your (and I actually mean your handle here) name would likely give it credibility in a weird sense. There's much less incentive to blindly upvote if it essentially shows what you saw like a slug trail, but if you're selectively giving oxygen to the best of what you see then that trail is valuable to others who value you. It's a functional change from competing to push things for their own sake.

Im old! I come from an era where there was no such thing as OPSEC as soon as you interact with another party you cant personally name. For every consumer that was the phone company, or literally right out the door. If you transmit (login credentials, personal info, search queries) the expectation is somewhere, someone or something is logging it. Not even maliciously all the time either, sometimes I got to some of this out of boredom. The corporate Internet just kind of acts like a middle man, because that same problem never went away, just siloed into companies.

Until we get to a future like Transmetropolitan where the expectation is your online presence has some dirty laundry (and hopefully leave out the other stuff), all the bits/bytes, not just upvotes, you transmit should have a limited expectation of privacy. This is just the best/latest reminder because every hack is the same problem, only the company has incentive to keep it quiet so it doesn't hit their bottom line.