based or cringe? One one hand human right activists in these countries are using Twitter to create awareness about the local isseus. On the other hand, CIA also uses it to manufacture consent to whatever plans they got

  • spectre [he/him]
    ·
    3 years ago

    Yeah if the Fediverse ever matures it's gonna be real hard to stamp out.

    • Awoo [she/her]
      ·
      3 years ago

      I don't think the problem is maturing Fediverse but incentivising bodies into it. Big money is what seems to move internet populations around these days and I don't know how you combat that without big money yourself. Fediverse needs monetary investment to blow up in the same way that Cryptocoin needed monetary investment to blow up. The key to creating fully decentralised social media in my opinion lies with also incentivising people into pushing it because they can profit from it.

      That is probably going to be an unpleasant thing to say for some people on this site, but it is a fact of the current society we live in and the left tends to overlook this reality a bit too much. I think it's a mistake for people to think we can take on the giants without some sort of investment, fighting fire with fire.

        • Awoo [she/her]
          ·
          3 years ago

          Ultimately I think the service that figures out how to make a social media tech that's both decentralised and also attractive to people the same way crypto was will really take things along to the next step. I have no idea what that will look like, some sort of revenue sharing decentralised social media sounds weird.

            • Awoo [she/her]
              ·
              3 years ago

              There have been a lot of attempts to do the revenue share thing, but in the words of Dan Olson, “If you’re a new video platform and your core selling point, your big launch feature, is a tip jar, forgive me if I’m having some déjà vu, but I’m pretty sure I’ve heard this song before.”

              Yeah you can't really do it as a revenue sharing thing. Functionally it has to work differently. Bitcoin is TECHNICALLY a revenue sharing thing though, "do work for the network by adding compute power to authenticate transactions and we'll share money with you in the form of blocks you mine". This is however a cleverly reworded and disguised revenue sharing model, hidden behind mining as a proxy and longterm incentive to expand the network.

              Striking the same incentives but with social media is hard but I believe someone will come upon something eventually. I don't know if it'll be fediverse or not. I just think that when money and decentralisation mingle in precisely the right way we'll see an upheavel of existing centralised systems. This will happen in particular because ancaps will push the ever loving fuck out of it for the same reasons they pushed bitcoin, and I think that it will be easier to blow it up by attempting to appeal to those types of people as opposed to just everyone generally. Interestingly, the left and these shits have a mutual interest in decentralisation.

        • Awoo [she/her]
          ·
          3 years ago

          Coops are a tool but they're not magically better in all cases and it's foolish to assume they are or always will be. They are better statistically. Factors like having the right team members and actually-pursuing-the-profit-motive are important, coops actually pursue profit.

          A major issue in leftist groups I keep seeing is teams that get bogged down in ideological thinking instead of doing what's actually best if they want to profit. There is a balance, but a lot of leftist groups fail to find it when they don't have the right people to push for it.

            • Awoo [she/her]
              ·
              3 years ago

              Oh absolutely. I just also see problems that need to be overcome. Teams that start as coops without an income seem to struggle to maintain motivation to grow a product until the point they can actually live on it for example.