It’s brief, around 25:15
https://youtube.com/watch?v=nf7XHR3EVHo
If you’ve been sitting on making a post about your favorite instance, this could be a good opportunity to do so.
Going by our registration applications, a lot of people are learning about the fediverse for the first time and they’re excited about the idea. I’ve really enjoyed reading through them :)
I wish he had mentioned Lemmy, but it’s understandable that he didn’t. Also Bluesky isn’t an alternative to big tech, it IS big tech. I wish it wasn’t stealing so much of our publicity lately.
But beggars can’t be choosers, and we have seen some nice growth over the past couple months. John Oliver fans are the perfect candidates to join the fediverse, hopefully some of them find their way to Lemmy.
John Oliver being uploaded to YouTube is awesome! I should comment that Lemmy is a great Reddit alternative
I’m really not happy about bluesky their fragmentation of the fediverse protocols is only going to harm us in the long run.
Intentionally, I think.
Have you heard of bridgy?
IMO bridgy is not well designed. The fact that it requires both the follower and the followee to specifically opt in basically makes it DOA. Both Mastodon and BlueSky are completely open and public in terms of post visibility, so bridgy should have been designed to require explicit opt outs from anyone who didn’t want their content bridged.
Bridgy started without that requirement and it pissed off too many Mastodonians so they reworked it
Well fuck the mastodonians their stupidity is no reason to make everyone else’s experience shitter.
I would have put it in less harsh terms, but yes, basically this.
shrug, I wish they were with us, but they are also a big ole corporate entity, so I’m kind ok with us staying our our side of the fence. As they need to implement payment and corporate protections to their network, we’re free to be free over here.
We don’t have to play ball. not with them anyway,
I think, If we have any credible threat, it’s going to be from the Governmental gross anti-tampering laws, forced moderation, or backup regulations. They could make it legally difficulty for us to exist.
This. I have considerable concern that Fascists will straight up ban Fedi if enough people shift to it. They don’t like not being able to control everything, Fedi is far too much actual freedom of communication.
The thing about fedi is how do u stop it. Ban every instances ip? make it illegal to use? They can try but they will have very little success.
You make laws like the Online Safety Act in the UK. You then attach a multi-million dollar fine to anyone who doesn’t adhere to the bonkers unenforceable stipulations in the text.
All of a sudden, no one but a corporation with a legal department can safely run an instance without putting their money and eventually freedom on the line.
They might not be able to just stop it, but you can force us into a pirate scenario where we have to do it in the dark.
We are likely starting to slowly head into 1984 territory. IF Fascim continues to rise, eventually, non-state-run media will be deemed unlawful and they’ll do what they can to make it go away.
This is why fedi needs to support federation over tor
When they get serious about encryption they will make tor illegal as well.
Tor will not hide you from the feds once they decide they really want to go after encryption. They can either own enough endpoints to find you directly or simply go and shut down all the endpoints. Or, If they have other IP leaks that are unpublished…
On the upside they are firing most of the competent people in government so there’s a chance the CIA can’t do that anymore
If china has failed to stop tor I doubt the us can do much better
They’d shut down large instances, pressure WordPress to remove support, in the US at least, it could be seen as too risky, if they wanted to they would find a way. I don’t think this would happen easily in the EU though.
Exactly, don’t let perfect be the enemy of good. Someone using BlueSky over Twitter is a good thing.
We still shouldn’t be doing the dirty work of rich people for them.
We should all be promoting Mastodon over the centralized and corporate-owned bluesky.
Talk to John Oliver then.
There are plenty of naive people on here also shilling bluesky over Mastodon.
Over or in addition to? I haven’t seen anyone say BlueSky over Mastodon.
Get your eyes checked.
Too late - we are already here!:-P
This was literally the photo that finally got me banned from Reddit years ago.
This; I’m so sick of hearing it pop up when people mention alternatives.
I’m not sure anyone mentions bluesky as an alternative to big tech.
Pretty sure they only mention it as an alternative to musk/X.
This right here, the everyday person doesn’t know what federation is let alone believes that it’s an alternative to federated platforms. They see it as a better Twitter that’s not run by Musk and honestly that’s all they need to know.
Err… why are we suggesting the corporate-owned and centralized bluesky over Mastodon then?
Oh right, viral marketing and useful idiots. I shouldn’t have expected more.
Agreed, but at least Bluesky is a public benefit corporation, so it supposed to take in the needs of society as well as profit in its decision-making. That may not be much, but it’s a start.
If I was losing money and wanted to mantain control over the public id become a public benefit corp too
“Public benefit corporation” is a meaningless designation. All it means is they have the option of putting their mission over their shareholders, not that they are obligated to do so.
Chances are it’s really just that, a start. See OpenAI.
I’m not familiar with the details of that, but it seems like more of a red herring to me. A form of controlled opposition to divert people away from truly revolutionary platforms.
Of course it has to seem like a plausible alternative, but is it actually decentralized or altruistic enough to make a meaningful difference? I think not.
“Public benefit corporation” is such an oxymoron, I know it’s cliché to say this but it reads like something out of 1984.
If your goal is truly to benefit the public, why wouldn’t you start a non-profit? It’s because they want profits, which will always be at odds with the interests of the public.
Because your non-profit isn’t likely to go anywhere; Capitalists don’t give significant money to non-profits, but they’ll invest in a public benefit corporation because of the potential for profit. The corporation can then take their money and use it for whatever public benefit it intends to work towards. It’s a workaround to try and scrape some benefit to society out of capital, that otherwise wouldn’t exist.
Whether Bluesky is actually a good example of a public benefit corporation or not, I have no idea, I don’t use it.