Bloonface

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

For example, I spent years on Reddit happily arguing with wrong people, deriving my "value" from just having fun interacting with folks about stuff. The server resources that Reddit expended supporting that were fairly trivial in dollar terms. [...] Instead Reddit hired 2000 staff for some reason

They hired 2000 staff because they were running one of the most highly-trafficked websites on the Internet, with hundreds of millions of users, something which unsurprisingly takes quite a lot of people to administer and maintain. Were Reddit to not invest in people and resources to keep the website running at that scale, you would not be able to use it in the way you enjoy and it would have nowhere near as much utility to you.

This is the entire point of the article that you missed - there are a shit-ton of costs in running a massive community that have to come from somewhere. Your approach is "well I don't think those costs are necessary". But they are.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You really couldn't be more wrong.

You don't have to be a Randroid or a libertarian, or even right wing, to understand that a discourse predicated on everyone getting everything for free with no real trade-off doesn't really make sense in the real world.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

For context, Instagram has two BILLION users. Facebook has just shy of three billion.

Mastodon has a total of ten million.

 

ActivityPub, the protocol that powers the fediverse (including Mastodon – same caveats as the first two times, will be used interchangeably, deal with it) is not private. It is not even semi-private. It is a completely public medium and absolutely nothing posted on it, including direct messages, can be seen as even remotely secure. Worse, anything you post on Mastodon is, once sent, for all intents and purposes completely irrevocable. To function, the network relies upon the good faith participation of thousands of independently owned and operated servers, but a bad actor simply has to behave not in good faith and there is absolutely no mechanism to stop them or to get around this. Worse, whatever legal protections are in place around personal data are either non-applicable or would be stunningly hard to enforce.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It gives my partner absolutely banging migraines in more than tiny quantities. I find it gives me huge cravings for junk food about an hour or two after drinking it.

I'd be happy if it disappeared.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

You've literally quoted two industry bodies who have a vested interest in keeping aspartame on the market.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Should have thought about that before you started treating them like serfs.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

ODF has been supported natively by Office for years now, and LibreOffice is able to open .docx files just fine.

I've never found a PDF "broken by Adobes bs".

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No trying to be explicitly contrarian, but the EEE strategy (embrace, extend, extinguish) is well known by this point and it always ended up with the open standard not being used anymore and falling into irrelevance (as it happened to XMPP after google and Facebook embraced).

XMPP was irrelevant before Google and Facebook had anything to do with it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Their following press releases would probably spin a very different narrative about immature tech and privacy concerns.

What else do you expect them to do? Say "oh yeah I guess a bunch of guys on fedi say we are arseholes, so we must be"?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I mean... realistically, why would that be their fault if they were to start a fedi instance and everyone else blocked them?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That kind of oversells what bias they might have.

They're well known as a reputable and honest polling organisation, regardless of their origins.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

YouGov is a top-tier reputable polling company that weights its samples to avoid any such confounding factors.

 

I’ve been using fediverse stuff (Mastodon and, most recently, Calckey – I’m just going to use “Mastodon” as shorthand here, purists can bite me) for over a year now, a…

view more: next ›