this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2023
1967 points (94.9% liked)
Fediverse
27398 readers
578 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to [email protected]!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yes.
Absolutely.
Literally the single biggest problem with fediverse adoption, brought up in every discussion about migrating to it. It will never replace centralized sites as long as it remains confusing and complicated.
https://www.reddit.com/r/RedditAlternatives/comments/14t9t66/im_so_lost_is_there_an_easy_mode_to_the_fediverse/
https://www.reddit.com/r/LemmyMigration/comments/145epgc/looking_for_a_lemmy_website_try_lemmyworld/
That's good. I originally looked at Mastodon years ago and it was just as complicated as Lemmy is now. Good that they figured out how to make it easy to use.
On Mastodon it's pretty easy. Download the official app and go through the prompts. They should probably have a little note saying "just go with the defaults if you're not sure" but this shouldn't be a road block for any normal person. The fact that Mastodon has a standard migration method makes this a low-impact decision.
Lemmy is definitely harder. "Jerboa" doesn't sound like an official app, and I don't think you can even create an account in Jerboa. So the first step is finding an instance on the web with no guidance. That's bad.
I still haven't joined Matrix because it's too hard. People say I shouldn't use matrix.org for various reasons (like bans without warning) but I can't find an alternative that seems sensible. All the guides I found are basically "you should really host your own, but if you're too much of a noob, here are some Polish lolicon-themed servers you can join". If it were possible to sign up without feeling like I'm doing something wrong, I would have many years ago.
Yeah with matrix it's really bad. I'm aware of a whole 5 matrix servers. matrix.org, the one that's run at my university, mine, and my 2 friend's matrix servers
Also all matrix clients are currently shit
I think this is not really inline with the philosophy of the main Lemmy devs. For this to happen, I think someone else would have to do the work of creating the random selection service. If it was popular enough, maybe they'd put a link on join-lemmy.org
There are differences between the servers, though. Instead of picking randomly, it should ask you a few questions about what you value and what you intend to do.
I made this account to look at NSFW stuff, for instance. I had read that lemmy.world was the biggest server and it checked all the boxes of allowing NSFW content, downvotes, community creation, etc.. "OK, should be fine." Only after trying it out did I realize that all NSFW thumbnails are blurred and you have to manually open each one, and lemmynsfw.com has a patch to fix that. So if you're making an account for that purpose, it should recommend that server.
Likewise, the admins of different servers have different goals and rules. beehaw is expressly created to oppose rationalism(???), for instance, and disabled downvotes and has heavy moderation of things that don't fit the admins' beliefs. The Lemmy sign-up process should give examples of the kinds of things that have been banned/moderated and ask if that's your thing or not your thing.
It should be kind of like https://chooser-beta.creativecommons.org/
(Also, server administration costs matter? Servers that are hosting lots of images will be more expensive to run. If you're consuming all that content with an account on another server, is that fair?)
So much this. The signups process desperately needs to be streamlined
I've been trying to decide what the best, smoothest, option is to make the fediverse "better".
I think that making a line between a "Fediverse client" and "Fediverse Server" is the answer. A client that can easily browse multitudes of servers, letting you join lemmy subs and follow mastodon accounts might be the answer.
I clicked it for you:
It's about as complicated as choosing an email provider.
Yeah, you can go with gorillamail, or just go with gmail/outlook like everyone who doesn't have a specific reason not to.
If you suggest to a new user anything other than choosing a big name instance, you're part of the problem.
Regular users are going to learn by experience, not theory.
I've spent all day trying to figure out the fediverse and I've read "it's just like email" about a hundred times. 😒
Yeah, you probably don't understand how email providers work either. You just use it and don't ask questions.
I do understand how email providers work, and Lemmy is not just like them. Stop saying this.
You can't post to Twitter from Facebook or vice versa, but if Facebook and Twitter were part of the Fediverse, then you could. Does that help?
Not to the average person, no. The fact that you have to explain this at all is the problem.
We could sit here and speculate about what makes sense to the average person all day, but at the end of the day it wouldn't amount to anything without evidence to back it up...user studies or something like that.
What I'm asking is does it make sense to you?
No, your analogy is not accurate. If Facebook and Twitter were part of the Fediverse, you might be able to post to one from the other, or you might not, depending on whether one had defederated from another other or not.
To extend the poor email analogy, it would be as if you had a Gmail account and tried to email a friend on Outlook, but you couldn't because Outlook refused to accept emails from any Gmail address, but you could get through to them if you sent it from a Yahoo address instead.
I don't understand your issue. It 100% could work that way as Microsoft could simply block Gmail requests because, I don't know, let's say they are constantly receiving malware from Gmail servers in attachments.
Email from Gmail to Outlook would fail but email from Gmail to Yahoo to Outlook would not as Yahoo to Outlook is not blocked.
It isn't a perfect analogy. I doubt that any analogy is. I regard defederation as an advanced topic, though, and it isn't necessary to understand it to grasp the basics.
Ok.
I like it here, but I feel like the community needs to rebrand already. "Fediverse" just sounds like something that'll never catch on
Brilliant!
Yeah, that's a beacon of shining success :) go for it
Makes sense, how would you resolve it without giving anyone centralized control to make Twitter or Reddit 2.0?
I think the best middle ground might be where there's a bunch of separate apps that all have their own default server, where they hide most of the fediverse complexity from the user. They'd still all be accessing the same content, but it would just be simpler for 'normal' users.
I think the point is to have the freedom available. Most people are going to get their email from GMail, but you have the freedom to get it somewhere else if you want to, and you can still send to and receive email from people using GMail. You can even roll your own mail server.
The official web ui is ugly and unbearable. I am on liftoff which is decent.
Yes, this is why I was never able to figure out getting an email address. Too many servers to choose from.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, defederation should be removed from the protocol. (And replaced with a default ban list that can be overriden by the user).
Each instance should basically just be a set of default settings that are used to access the same shared pool of content.
This removes the new user hurdle, because they can now join any instance and not be worried that they are making some important, permanent decision. If they find that they don't like something about the instance, they can tweak their settings later.
Also, some of the other solutions to this issue carry significant risks. Pushing users towards a 'default' instance increases centralization. Apps that are preconfigured to use a specific instance are even worse (since people wont want to change instance if it means giving up a familiar app). Without some degree of vigilance decentralized services tend to centralize over time. This gives too much power over the entire fediverse to a handful of instance admins. If an instance with 60% of all users starts defederating all smaller instances, most users will just migrate to the larger instance.
This isn't just some theoretical that I pulled out of my ass, its an easily abusable weakness of federated services. It has been abused in the past, and there is no reason to believe it wont be abused again.
Google used it to kill XMPP. Facebook will almost certainly use it to kill mastodon, once they siphon enough users and content to build a critical mass. Microsoft is so notorious for using this strategy that they has their own internal phrase for it: Embrace, Extend, Extinguish.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish