If Facebook and Reddit and Twitter are all going downhill, what leads people to believe that websites like Mastadon or Lemmy won’t go the same way eventually?

  • necrobius@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Two reasons:

    1. Lemmy admins aren’t accountable to investors or shareholders so there’s no pressure to make things worse.
    2. If enhsittification happens on any instance. Like it’s owned by a cooperation. Then other instances can block it/defederate, or users can move to another instance
      • Bruno Finger@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        11 months ago

        Imagine GIMP is enshitified somehow. Well that won’t work because the source code is available and people will just create a fork and work with that instead.

        There’s many Lemmy and Mastodons servers AND clients out there, being open source is already one thing add federation on top and you see no one really is in control of Lemmy or Mastodon as a whole.

        • phillaholic@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Is Gimp as fragmented as Lemmy? If I want to use the blue tool do I have to use Gimp A, and crop Gimp B? With Lemmy entire genres could just disappear if my iteration defederates with the interaction that hosted all the interesting topics. If that happens then the community all gets split up among other communities which likely will never come back whole again. It’s the Linux model, which is fine for longevity and availability, but it’s not good for keeping like minded people together. Fragmentation might be fine for a tool, but it’s not great for community.

        • phillaholic@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Because instances getting larger are going to incur exponentially larger costs. If the largest communities start suffering from performance issues or something like that, it fragments the community into who knows how many instances the community will be split into. The only problem Lemmy has is lack of users and engagement, and I think it’s actually flawed by design in this way. It’s like having a big party, but instead of everyone in one house you split it into a bunch of them with not that many people or food options. Idk if that’s ideal or not.

          • ElGosso [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            For us over at Hexbear that’s a feature, not a bug. Our instance exists explicitly because we don’t want to be subjected to the political moderation of others.

      • jws_shadotak@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        Lemmy can always stay small. If an instance is getting too bogged down, they can close sign ups and people will find other instances. Federation helps spread the load.