Decentralized FOSS socials are great technical achievements but I feel like the actual product that users will interact with are worse copy cats of already established social platforms. Mastodon is a Twitter clone, Lemmy is a reddit clone, peertube is a youtube clone. I love these FOSS/decen. platforms but the frontend that users actually interact with are just copies of already popular platforms, just with another backend. What innovative FOSS/decen. social platforms exist? Not talking about the backend but the user experience.
this post was submitted on 03 Feb 2025
895 points (96.0% liked)
Technology
61456 readers
4111 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
why are people frothing over Bluesky? this is just Twitter but owned by a different oligarch
Yeah, why would I use BlueSky when I could just use my favorite platform named Threads?
Tap for spoiler
Just kidding
No clue. Never found those platforms to be useful, just toxic.
Same here... even when Twitter was not even in the sights of fElon I found it to be super toxic. I signed up because "it was the best way to get the news" and left in about 4 days
They have an addiction to that kind of socials.
Because they learned nothing
Because it isn't just Twitter. Nobody can buy the network, the same way nobody can buy email.
- Anyone can host a server.
- Anyone can make an app.
- Anyone can make an algorithm.
- Anyone can make a moderation service. Users can freely pick a server, app, algorithm, and moderation service.
Good with some competition. We need much more in that area.
Bluesky is like Twitter but with about 1/10th the idiots, and no mechanism that the idiots can elevate their racist, moronic hot takes above other comments.
Bluesky will follow the same enshittification trajectory Twitter did, it is just the beginning of the rollercoaster where the coaster is slowly brought up to the top to be launched... and everyone is exclaiming "wow I haven't even thrown up yet!" as if that was any indicator of how much they were about to throw up...
Maybe it will, but for the time being it hasn't. The experience is so vastly better than Twitter, that it's a no brainer to jump over. It also helps to have a decent competing platform that people like to suck users and influence away from the platform that Musk turned into a cesspit.
I don’t think it will go down the same path as Twitter, since Bluesky is open source and available on Github other devs will have the possibility to improve it or create a better version of it but with the more users joining it might necessary to monetize it to better cover the costs. I would love to see everyone switching to the Fediverse but it’s not very intuitive for the average end user with the instances and the fact that you need to target a user and an instance to follow it
To anyone bemoaning BlueSky's lack of federation, check out Free Our Feeds.
It's a campaign to create a public interest foundation independent from the Bluesky team (although the Bluesky team has said they support them) that will build independent infrastructure, like a secondary "relay" as an alternative to Bluesky's that can still communicate across the same protocol (The "AT Protocol") while also doing developer grants for the development of further social applications built on open protocols like the AT Protocol or ActivityPub.
They have the support of an existing 501c(3), and their open letter has been signed by people you might find interesting, such as Jimmy Wales (founder of Wikipedia).
This is such a half-assed dog and pony show.
They have millions in investment, why do they need someone else to fund this? Why don't the bluesky team directly and materially support them?
This is a core aspect of Bluesky's marketing and they asking other volunteers to help make them rich.
Until there's overt advertising its unlikely to enshittify the normal way. That doesn't mean it won't, just that a different capital process is at work. Wikipedia has outlived most of "web2.0" because its funded by donations and run by volunteers.
Until there's overt advertising its unlikely to enshittify the normal way.
Trust me we will be deep into that territory so fast it is going to make your head spin.
Wikipedia has outlived most of "web2.0" because its funded by donations and run by volunteers.
Private equity and VC funding can't directly buy Wikipedia and dissect it because it is an at least somewhat functional non-profit organization. That is the only reason.
What would a comparable example be?
Twitter was ad driven and was enshittifying before musk bought it, and sold because they were a public company.
Jay Graber will likely get bored and sell it off or monetize eventually but twitter is definitely not the model here.
Ah yes, "free our feeds" where millionaire VCs are asking for donations
The only thing the Fediverse is missing is way to migrate from 1 instance to another
It actually does exist, at least on Mastodon, but is still very janky (e.g. old posts aren't moved over due to "technical limitations")
Automatically makes people unfollow your old account and re-follow your new account, then makes your old instance's link redirect to your new instance's one.
load more comments
(14 replies)
view more: next ›