Right... (deep breath)
We *need* community-owned decentralised social networks. The Fediverse is the only place where this exists.
Centralised corporate social networks are easier to use because of investors' money, but these same investors demand ever-larger profits by spying on users, manipulating feeds and encouraging toxic engagement.
The Fediverse is trickier to use because it is decentralised and community-owned, but that's also what protects it from being bought out and enshittifying.
LPS likes this.
reshared this
unicornCoder ☑️ :gnome: :bash:
in reply to Fedi.Tips • • •Sexybiggetje🐖
in reply to Fedi.Tips • • •well that's all true, but what scares me on the fediverse is also that same power. People share unverified blocks. What you see in society also happens here, if you're not in the right box you're defederated.
Whilst that's not a too large problem *now* it does create small islands. And that's everyone's right! And also a good thing! But it's also a thin line for polarisation and something to always keep in mind.
Luckily we also have great personal tools (mute, block, etc) to help.
LPS
in reply to Fedi.Tips • •WanderingVoron likes this.
Lord Caramac the Clueless, KSC
in reply to Fedi.Tips • • •Fedi.Tips
Unknown parent • • •That's why I run an account at @FediGarden and website at fedi.garden highlighting the best smaller instances.
And it's not quite as bad as you're implying with that statistic:
fedidb.org/network
On top of that, people can move their Fediverse accounts elsewhere without losing their followers or leaving the network. If the worst happens they have an escape route. This isn't possible outside the Fediverse.
LPS likes this.
Rin/Mari (mainline)
in reply to Fedi.Tips • • •Website League also exists - the key difference is that instances have to be approved by the League administration to be part of the overall network, rather than Mastodon operating on server-to-server blocks.
In short it's a confederation model as opposed to Mastodon's federation model.
Rin/Mari (mainline)
in reply to Rin/Mari (mainline) • • •Fedi.Tips
in reply to Rin/Mari (mainline) • • •@rinmari
You don't need to do that on the Fediverse. Servers can use allowlists, where all other servers are blocked by default.
On an allowlist, if a server wants to federate with your server, admins have to manually allow them to federate. All the toxic stuff is blocked by default, and you'll only see servers your admin has approved.
It's slower to build connections, but the connections are higher quality and safer.
Mastodon's allowlist option (called isolated mode) isn't advertised much.
ティージェーグレェ
in reply to Fedi.Tips • • •The *only* place?
/me's feelings of having been a user of NNTP, IRC, SILC, XMPP and more over the previous decades are hurt.
Andreas, DJ3EI, he/him
in reply to ティージェーグレェ • • •I'm fully with you on that one, @teajaygrey ! Was about to mention the venerable netnews, Jabber, maybe even plain mailing lists. Your list is better.
A small amount of exaggeration can do a lot to weaken an otherwise perfectly reasonable argument.
So don't exaggerate.
@FediTips
Fedi.Tips
in reply to Andreas, DJ3EI, he/him • • •I'm a big fan of XMPP, IRC etc but I wouldn't call them social networks, they're more like messaging and chat services?
If you do call them social networks then yes I stand corrected! 👍
adison verlice
in reply to Fedi.Tips • • •also fuck the corporate social networks...mastodon, peertube, pixelfed and the fediverse for the win!
camera
in reply to Fedi.Tips • • •Bob 🇺🇲♒🐧🪖
in reply to Fedi.Tips • • •Another decentralized network is XMPP. I've been running an OpenFire server for ever and will never use signal.
Decentralize your life!!! 😁
Fedi.Tips
in reply to Bob 🇺🇲♒🐧🪖 • • •XMPP is excellent! 👍 Cheap and simple to run, decentralised, FOSS, end to end encrypted, very suitable for community ownership.
Only reason I didn't mention it in original post is it's not a social network as such, but yes would definitely recommend people check it out.
Bob 🇺🇲♒🐧🪖
in reply to Fedi.Tips • • •EcksDy
in reply to Fedi.Tips • • •@allenstenhaus @FediGarden
Is there any way to move without leaving duplicate accounts on the previous server?
Fedi.Tips
in reply to EcksDy • • •I'm not sure what you mean by duplicate?
The old account redirects people to the new account, as do the old posts.
You can move to any account, it doesn't have to look the same or have the same name as the old account.
Stemy
in reply to Fedi.Tips • • •The problem is that its trickiness is precisely what keeps most people away from the fediverse. You'd be surprised how much people are willing to throwaway their freedom and accept enshittification for the sake of the ease.
And the fediverse is not immune to enshittification, most of the existing instances are currently owned by cryptobros nazis.
Fedi.Tips
in reply to Stemy • • •I'm trying to explain and compare the tradeoffs in this situation, so that people can find it easier to make a choice based on their own priorities.
"most of the existing instances are currently owned by cryptobros nazis."
Not in my experience?
If they are, they'll be tiny one person instances that most instances block.
Stemy
in reply to Fedi.Tips • • •Fedi.Tips
in reply to Stemy • • •@stemy
It's perhaps not as complicated as people think, it's just a bit different to what they're used to doing online?
Everyone uses federated networks all the time: phones, email, the postal system. But they are used to using these, so they don't find them complicated.
If you could get people to think about the Fediverse the same way they think about email or phones, maybe that might make it easier for them to try it?
There's a good short video about this at:
tilvids.com/w/f747058d-3991-40…
Damian Yerrick
in reply to Fedi.Tips • • •beesbuzz.biz/blog/12455-Indiew…
Allen
in reply to Fedi.Tips • • •@EcksDy I get the impression they may not want to leave traces of themselves on their current insurance. Moving their account does. Creating a new account, manually moving followers, but not using the "move account" option allows them to delete their account altogether without leaving a trace behind.
I strongly suspect personal privacy is the motivator for this.
Fedi.Tips
in reply to Allen • • •If you don't want to leave any traces, you just delete the old account.
"Creating a new account, manually moving followers"
You can't manually move followers (people who follow you). You have to move your account to move your followers. It works like this because otherwise spammers etc could use it to falsely claim followers and spam people's timelines.
Turkey MacGuffin :damnified:
in reply to Allen • • •@allenstenhaus @EcksDy
Can you move your account, then request that the tombstone record be deleted from the old server?
Fedi.Tips
in reply to Turkey MacGuffin :damnified: • • •@DXMacGuffin @allenstenhaus @EcksDy
If you want to keep old account but remove redirect:
1. Log into old account on your old server's website, this will take you to Account settings.
2. Scroll down to "move to a different account", click on link
3. Click on "cancel redirect" at top. This will reactivate your old account.
If you want to delete your old account:
1. Log into old account on old server's website.
2. Scroll down to Delete Account, click the link and follow instructions.
Allen
in reply to Fedi.Tips • • •Fedi.Tips
in reply to Allen • • •@allenstenhaus @EcksDy
Ah, sorry, apologies!
Fedi.Tips
Unknown parent • • •@nellie_m @allenstenhaus @EcksDy
Yes, you can delete your old account if you want to leave no traces. It would be much harder for people to find your new account, but if this is what you want that's totally doable.
nellie-m
in reply to Fedi.Tips • • •@allenstenhaus @EcksDy
but once you’ve done that, you could delete your old account without a trace if you wanted, no?