Skip to main content


reshared this

in reply to Laurens Hof

> When the Mastodon pilot launched in September 2023, Mastodon had around 1.7M monthly active users, a number that has dropped a year later to around 1.1M

Are we talking about just Mastodon or the fediverse as a whole (a big chunk of which is Mastodon for now, but ...).

But this is a great example of why there's an urgent need to update or replace the NodeInfo protocol (originally part of Diaspora) that's used for collecting fediverse stats.

socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/…

#NodeInfo

in reply to Strypey

It's also a great example of why fragmenting the total pool of people using decentralised social networks across multiple protocols is such a regressive idea. The social web as a whole is growing apace. But because the growth is divided between the fediverse, Matrix, ATmosphere, Nostr-verse and a long tail of vanity protocols, it's harder to see, and it's not creating the network effects that all those accounts being on one protocol would.

#fediverse #fragmentation

in reply to Strypey

@LaurensHof
> I recommend this article for an extensive overview of the variety of ways that the term ‘fediverse’ is used by different groups of people

I don't. The author of this piece has an agenda, to fragment the network effects of the fediverse across as many incompatible protocols as possible. They demonstrate a profound intellectual dishonesty in their rewriting of fediverse history, disregarding independently verifiable facts, and aggressively attacking anyone who calls them on this.

in reply to Strypey

I don't make such serious accusations lightly. I'm willing to discuss all 3 claims in detail, and for anyone wants evidence here's some receipts.

An agenda to fragment the network effects of the fediverse across many incompatible protocols, see the second comment by @jdp23 here;

archive.is/bY2NN

Rewriting of fediverse history and aggressively attacking anyone who disagrees, see the responses here;

archive.is/W6O2P

... and their first comment here;

archive.is/bY2NN

in reply to Laurens Hof

> The explicit exclusion and rejection of Bluesky and the AT Protocol as not the correct protocol

Not sure what "not the correct protocol" means in this context, but ATProto is not a fediverse protocol. Because;

a) it's not actually decentralised. BlueSky controls the ID layer

b) no legacy fediverse software app implements it, except a single IndieWeb bridge (BridgyFed)

c) none of the software implementing it supports a single legacy fediverse protocol

#BlueSky #ATProto

in reply to Laurens Hof

> As the SWF will become a W3C member, and will likely continue to be active in the W3C groups, Meta being a supporter of the SWF will likely not diminish these worries

FarceBook has been a member of W3C since long before ActivityPub was even standardised. Nothing to see here. If there's evidence that SWF is compromising traditional fediverse principles in FarceBook's favour, instead of offering them a refund, then and only then will there be a reason to be suspicious of the SWF.