Yes, people chase content, which means chasing where many people are, but why did Bluesky become a mainstream alternative and Mastodon didn’t?
I’m saying marketing doesn’t cut it, and it’s not just about where most users are either, otherwise everyone but Threads would be irrelevant.
People bounce off both Threads and Mastodon, and there are platform-related reasons for that.
That may be true for some people, but isn’t a valid generalization. See the Brazil blocking Twitter situation.
Millions decided to give Bluesky a chance and a graph showed daily user activity quadrupling. Now, a not-insignificant portion are saying they refuse to return to Twitter because:
Sound familiar?
And I’m pretty sure Misskey has more features. Hell, Mastodon as well probably. Bluesky doesn’t even support video yet.
The first sin of the Fediverse isn’t being small, that’s the second. First is being a pain in the ass.
This was one of the reasons I left, and I assumed most disliked the official app, but weren’t willing to part with the content.
Now, I think I was too close minded. Stuck in my bubble. If it’s not in a discussion about reddit sucking, chances are people don’t care that much.
App sucks? Didn’t think about that, it’s just an app. App really sucks? Whatever, they already use 5 other apps that are worse.
The medium shapes the experience, but isn’t an experience unto itself. Not that important to the average person.
Why are there three forks(?) of what I assume is Misskey? I think the original is still kicking, even.
With modern internet speeds, there’s no reason you can’t have full UHD-BR quality streamed over the internet.
Cost is a prohibitive reason for many (hardware, internet).
I do believe files are better than physical media, simply because with the proper setup they’re easily backed up and won’t degrade or break.
Andreas doesn’t need a bunch of people harassing him for a multitude of reasons that may or may not be true. What I believe he needs, is to reevaluate his actions and grow out of what seems to be a toxic mentality, conscious or not.
I’m not the very knowledgeable on this, but I think most people don’t grow from being attacked.
Realistically, it can’t stop the stubborn. But if it helps anyone reconsider, I’ll take it.
all the statements made in the article are sourced.
If only his sources matter, link those instead. Bringing in Lunduke’s article means bringing in his views. That’s not some special Lunduke-hate-boner property, if anyone linked an Israeli news website in a thread about Gaza, I’d call that ridiculous too. Articles reflect their authors, and you happened to pick one of the worst authors in tech.
You’re acting like the blogger is attacking you specifically or something.
Because Lunduke’s ideas can cause real damage to people’s lives, and I’m tired of seeing them. Again, I’m sorry if I come across as affronted—this genuinely, deeply frustrates me. And it’s hard to hold that down.
I don’t blame you. I don’t know how you found the article, or how you read it. But please reconsider sharing Lunduke’s stuff. The man’s one step away from conspiracy theorist, or hell, maybe he counts as one already.
Andreas said it simple (While in different words). What does your sex have to do with the project? Absolutely nothing.
“In different words” is doing a lot of work, there. But that’s a great point you made, sex has nothing to do with the project. So why did he reject a simple change which only made sex even less relevant?
And I ask again: which other side is Lunduke representing that you felt was important to include?
Purely anecdotally from what I’ve been reading online, it seems most younger folks hate Threads.
Not necessarily because of privacy issues or social impact, mind you. They also think it just sucks to use, don’t like the UI, don’t like the content—which turned out to include a lot of people trying to build a personal brand and sell you things. Just like Instagram, where most users came from.
Excluding content details, Mastodon fails similarly. Requires learning, unsatisfactory UI, more difficult to find and engage with content you like.
Apologies, I added a lot to my comment in an edit before I saw your reply. Regardless, which other side is Lunduke representing that’s important to share?
I’m actually just echo’ing what others have said.
Sorry, I don’t want to be mean, but genuinely, why would you reply and mention the CEO if you don’t know what the issue with them is? Had I not inquired further, would you ever add this context, unprompted?
Re: your move to LibreWolf, it’s your prerogative. If you like, keep at it. I will mention that I’ve seen a lot of misunderstandings regarding the latest ad stuff in Firefox, so I hope you got the correct picture to make your decisions, but I won’t bore you with details needlessly.
Lunduke is not a credible source. He’s inconsistent and has misled people countless times. I’ll still check it out and respond, but will also link other resources.
Edit: You know, I wanted to respond to the linked post by Lunduke point by point, but sincerely… I’m so tired of seeing his kind of content. It’s always the same mistakes, and he never learns.
And I’m not sure if he’s even worth bringing into this discussion. I made my point, and I provided my source. If anyone wanted to talk, ask further, even dispute, I’m willing to explain myself and provide further resources.
But I never called Andreas transphobic, or misogynistic, or a slave owner. Lunduke found the absolute worst materials to represent something he dislikes. Why is that relevant here? Should I answer for these people, who I’ve never met? Do they represent me?
Also, in his cherry-picking, Lunduke erases important context simply because it doesn’t support his views. Lea’s and Andreas’ conversation on Twitter painted a more complete picture of the issue with Andreas’ actions, but of course Lunduke only shows the tweet of Andreas being seemingly reasonable.
Worse, it’s like he genuinely has no idea what he’s talking about sometimes. He just needs to build a narrative and push it onto others, hopefully finding people who’ll take his views on reality as gospel.
Attacks Across Open Source
So many projects:
SUSE & openSUSE. Hyprland. Asahi Linux. Elementary OS. NixOS.
Lunduke, what? Genuinely, what are you on?
In fact, if recent history is any indication, we’re likely to see additional attacks involving Open Source Software projects and companies – by the Trans Political Activists – in the near future.
…Trans rights are ruining open source? That’s your grand theory?
Might be, as it seems he doesn’t take trans folks very seriously:
Back in 2022 – yes, two years ago – on the Discord chat server for the Hyprland window manager project, a man who identified as “Trans” listed his preferred prouns as “she/her”. lunduke
I’m so sorry, but Lunduke’s brand of journalism tires and saddens me. It’s a slap in the face to anyone who cares about not only understanding the full picture of events, but being just in how you deliver the truth to others. And then, on top of that, he acts like a jerk.
Here’s a video by Niccolò, KDE developer, showing how Lunduke is inconsistent, heavily biased and spectacularly fails at his own (and only) job.
I noticed you’re not the person I was replying to, but since you’ve joined the conversation, would you mind clarifying who and what the issue with them is?
As I understand it, Baker left the position, and Chambers is only temporarily assuming it—that is to say, we don’t actually know who’ll be CEO next year, I think.
I might be out of the loop, here. I don’t imagine you’re talking about the foundation, either.
I was so excited for Ladybird, right up until I found out the project lead and main developer, Andreas Kling, is scared of pronouns.
Again, I’m aware some folks think this is annoying, but if you’re the kind of user who shuns Brave because the CEO does stupid shit, Ladybird probably isn’t the way to go either. Not for the moment, at least. People deserve the right to make informed decisions, so I’ll keep sharing this, and I encourage others to do the same when relevant, but don’t harass anyone, please.
If you don’t care about any of this, it’s a very interesting project. I just can’t say I approve.
Why do you think they don’t care anymore? Agreed on the Servo optimism, though. And I hadn’t heard about Basilisk before, so thanks for mentioning it.
Thanks. I know you’re not OP, but I’ll take this opportunity to answer anyway.
…is not as bad as many people think.
The best argument that I believe still has merit is this:
All websites on the internet—including ad networks!—are guests on our computers, and the content they provide are merely suggestions for a user agent to interpret and show us how it chooses.
If you agree with this—and I kinda do—then yeah, PPA shouldn’t exist. You’re probably a staunch user of uBlock (or uMatrix) and don’t want your browser engaging in any privacy-preserving attribution shenanigans.
But here’s the kicker: if you use uBlock, PPA won’t do anything. It can’t, even when left enabled. For the API to be called, ads need to get to your browser first, and uBlock doesn’t allow them to get that far. The only people really affected by PPA are people not using adblocking, i.e. the people being tracked all over the web, who would likely benefit from PPA.
As I said in a previous comment: if PPA works and is widely adopted, I can see the argument for how it’d be better—unfortunately, most people still browse the internet without uBlock. That doesn’t mean I’ll stop installing it on every device I can; I’m simply accepting that’ll never be every device on earth.
And for all that Mozilla is implementing “bullshit,” they’re also the only ones keeping uBlock 100% functional by maintaining manifest V2. They spend time and resources protecting the very thing that trumps their supposed bullshit. That feels not like enshittification to me, but a group trying its best, even while stuck between a rock and a hard place.
What do you believe Mozilla was implementing?
However, its design is a little too complex to be used at small sizes, as you would in text or in a button.
I wonder what the criteria are. Because ⁂ just looks like three blurry dots to me. It’s not making things worse, but I wouldn’t say it’s making them much better either.
I think I agree with the major point of the article, that many gaming journalists… don’t do a great job. At all. Many seem to outright hate the communities they serve, which can’t be healthy for either side.
But it certainly wasn’t this article that convinced me. It’s needlessly hostile, contains personal attacks and petty insults, and despite its many claims and assumptions about Deadlock, gaming companies, journalists and gamers, it has only 4 outgoing links—one of them, bizarrely, simply to x.com—and nothing else. Screenshots? More supporting evidence? Have a useless picture of Valve’s office, I guess.
One of the linked resources is a tweet:
bye Twitter Quoted tweet: “Where to find Verge staff on Mastodon https://theverge.com/23519135/mastodon…”
Why does the author think this is relevant?
Their Twitter account links to a Mastodon address, a throwback to when Elon Musk bought the website and the journos had a hissy fit because they could no longer backchannel to have accounts banned for telling them to “learn to code.”
Wow, that’s why you think people were complaining? Nothing else, no other possible undesirable consequence arising from Musk’s takeover of Twitter? Not even his influence in levels and management of hate speech and misinformation in the platform?
Indeed, the majority of his last month’s output on Twitter – now X.com – is whining about Musk and bizarrely saying “bye Twitter” despite The Verge still being very much active on the site. It’s all so tiresomely typical.
It’s actually quite common for organizations that give mastodon a chance to keep their Twitter account as well. It’s the sad reality that most people (many of their following) will stay on Twitter. See Mozilla for another example, they host their own instance, even, but that sadly doesn’t mean they can throw away Twitter.
So the journalist in question shows support for mastodon, both by mentioning their account and bringing attention to the fact that The Verge is also joining, and this is your reaction? If you know why this happens, it’s misleading, and if you don’t, then it’s a failure in reporting. Both are bad and make me hesitant to believe anything else you say.
By the way, I’m curious about your choice of platform. I wonder what factors led to you picking nazi central as your center of operations. I’m not claiming you’re a Nazi, it’s just… you’re sitting at the table with them, you know?
The answer is games journalism, maybe journalism in general, has become a largely self-serving practice where nothing matters except appearing smarter than the audience you’re supposed to serve.
Well said, Richard. Definitely got that feeling just now.
And to people thinking The Verge sucks completely: don’t generalize publishers like this, please! You should be critical, aware of their leanings and biases, but remember that they’re still an organization hosting multiple writers with different skills too. The Verge has some solid reporting, like when they showed how SEO ruined the web. They also have some utterly shameful moments—let us never forget The Verge PC—just like most other media.
When the color of their skin is otherwise irrelevant, I get you, but in this instance I think it’s relevant because Trump seems like a racist idiot. It’s salt upon injury, not because a rare black man who happens to be articulate owned him, but because a rare articulate man who happens to be black did. The point is the same, but the latter doesn’t perpetuate racism. Context matters.
Maybe I’m too naive, but that’s how I interpreted OP’s comment.
There’s a chance duckduckgo does something similar, but sadly I can’t check at the moment.
Leaving a comment so I remember to try it later—unless anyone reading is willing to do so.