this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2024
245 points (94.2% liked)

Technology

59679 readers
3408 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Hegar@fedia.io 78 points 1 week ago (3 children)

It's not outside capital that leads to enshittification, it's leverage that enshittifies a service.

A VC that understands that they can force you to wreck your users' lives is always in danger of doing so. A VC who understands that doing this will make your service into an empty – and thus worthless – server is far less likely to do so (and if they do, at least your users can escape).

Incredibly clear article pointing out that no individuals will ever be able to resist enshittifaction pressures indefinitely.

The only way to prevent people with power from emiserating others is to structurally remove any benefit to doing so.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 week ago

so, socialism?

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Last 16 years of my life have taught me (though I had read that stated before, just without such experimental confirmation) that even such obvious mechanisms humans don't understand.

I mean, if you show the world as consisting of negotiating groups exchanging value in different dimensions, it's pretty clear.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] WeUnite@lemm.ee 27 points 1 week ago

The concerns are true but if people leave Twitter for Bluesky it's still an improvement because Elon uses the algorithm to boost far-right content and he has your data.

[–] tehn00bi@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I mean, what if “we” just stop using various social media platforms all together? I remember the days when various people never really shared their opinions and beliefs about most topics to the general public. Maybe we should get back to face to face conversations about life topics.

[–] ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

It's unlikely it'll go back in the bottle, and that style of social media is capable of facilitating positive social change (Arab spring as one example) that may not have been possible without it.

[–] tehn00bi@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The single example of a possible positive outcome? I remember when this happened, they made a big deal about it, however it may not have had that much of a positive effect. You know the void left to be filled with someone as bad or worse. https://www.cnn.com/2016/04/27/middleeast/egypt-how-we-got-here/index.html

[–] ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 week ago

Yes, it's unfortunate it didn't have a positive effect long term due to being coopted. :(

As people are going to continue to use twitter style websites until they fall out of fashion, I figure its best if that twitter-like is at least not controlled by people who can go rogue and do severe damage to society, such as what happened with twitter.

We realistically can't ban them, we can only mitigate the bad. Personally I don't use twitter style social media, only Lemmy.

[–] merrydrunkenness@lemm.ee 3 points 1 week ago

Agreed, I left twitter almost a year ago and haven't felt the need to sign up for any of its alternatives, federated or not. I just haven't felt like my life is missing anything by not using these platforms.

[–] TORFdot0@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Humans are social creatures by nature. The goal should be to improve our social interactions instead of letting others exploit them for profit

You can’t put that tube back in the tube of toothpaste

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Day 2984783 of mentally substituting "enshittification" with "rot"

[–] ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 23 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Enshittification is specifically how something inevitably gets worse and more anti-user due to pressures from capitalism/shareholders/profit incentive.

Rot, at least in my mind, is not that specific. It could mean the codebase is not well maintained and slowly failing, as an example.

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Yes, that's true, but the word sounds bad so I'm using the more fun one. I suppose we could use a qualifier, like "corporate rot"

[–] Jtotheb@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

Cory Doctorow actually coined the term, so a decent strategy given how poorly it’s used would be to trust its use any time you read him and substitute it every other time

[–] TORFdot0@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Corporate rot sounds better than just rot as enshittification happens on purpose due to seeking to extract maximum value from something where as rot is just a natural consequence of atrophy over time

[–] BatmanAoD@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

What is actually missing from AT Proto to be usable in the way Doctorow describes? He writes:

Bluesky lacks the one federated feature that is absolutely necessary for me to trust it: the ability to leave Bluesky and go to another host and continue to talk to the people I've entered into community with there. While there are many independently maintained servers that provide services to Bluesky and its users, there is only one Bluesky server. A federation of multiple servers, each a peer to the other, has been on Bluesky's roadmap for as long as I've been following it, but they haven't (yet) delivered it.

But according to the source code repo, federation features are fully available, including independent servers. There's even a guide for setting up an independent server: https://atproto.com/guides/self-hosting

Edit: looks like I'm probably not missing anything, and the protocol is fully capable of what Doctorow wants, it just doesn't have any other large instances yet: https://social.coop/@bnewbold/113420983888441504

Edit 2: I found a post that seems much more honest and informative about the actual limitations of AT Proto. In particular:

Relays cannot talk to Relays. If Bluesky Social, PBC decided to show ads (or do something else you don’t like), it would be very hard for you to switch to a different Relay and still be able to interact with all the other folks who stayed at the Bluesky Social, PBC Relay.

Edit 3: the "more honest" post above actually appears to be misleading as well: https://bsky.app/profile/shreyanjain.net/post/3lbndy6pknc2k

[–] TORFdot0@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I’ve read over the documentation a few times and maybe I’ve missed it somewhere else but I’m not aware of any option to host a relay yet. As far as I know only self hosting PDS’s are an option now (which only handle your own data and authentication but still relies on a relay to serve you content from the rest of the network) and app views (which are the front ends that sort and show content)

So in a sense bluesky is distributed and portable within the ATProto network, but still centralized until other entities can host relays and interopt (or opt out of interoperability) within the network.

[–] BatmanAoD@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] TORFdot0@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Thank you for sharing, that’s exactly what I was looking for!

[–] mPony@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I totally get where Cory is coming from on this. He's been around long enough to have actually seen these things happen, from a perspective that's effectively unique. I believe him when he talks about this stuff. I get his point of not putting effort into building up a platform that can hold him and his audience hostage.

but here's the good part.

People bailing on Twitter to join Bluesky is reasonably easy (there are tools available to find your friends on the new system). If it's easy to bail on Twitter to join Bluesky, it will be similarly easy to bail on Bluesky to join Mastodon, if/when that becomes necessary.

[–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Yes, because it's so easy to get people to switch to a different service!

I tried to get my friends to move from Facebook to Diaspora. How many of them did? ZERO. Not even the ones who like to talk about how much they hate Facebook.

Look what it took to peel off users from Twitter! The last straw had to be Elon getting a dictator elected. And even then, it's only a fraction of users.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 7 points 1 week ago

There's a quote from Eric S. Raymond about the issue of getting people to switch to something better (in this case the OS Plan 9) if there's already something that's fulfilling the need just enough that it becomes difficult to get anyone to move.

it looks like Plan 9 failed simply because it fell short of being a compelling enough improvement on Unix to displace its ancestor. Compared to Plan 9, Unix creaks and clanks and has obvious rust spots, but it gets the job done well enough to hold its position. There is a lesson here for ambitious system architects: the most dangerous enemy of a better solution is an existing codebase that is just good enough.

The fear now is that people will just switch to Bluesky until it becomes like Twitter, and it's not a guarantee that Mastodon will be next in line. It could be another closed service that's primed to take its place, and thus, the cycle continues.

[–] teolan@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Except it's been 2 years and most people haven't yet migrated away from Twitter to anything.

[–] hamsterkill@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That's true from our perspective, but not from someone like Cory's.

The trap he writes about being stuck on these platforms is because he doesn't just have friends and people he follows on these platforms — he has an audience. And closing his Twitter or Facebook or whatever would mean leaving large audiences that he has built up behind.

Cory stays on those platforms as his own version of the (justifiable, but regretful) compromise he writes about companies making. Better to stay on those shitty platforms and continue to reach people than abandon both the shitty platforms and his audiences there.

That's why he doesn't want to put effort into building an audience somewhere that might force him into the same compromise again.

[–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago

Even if you aren't Cory, you have to face leaving behind the people who won't switch (which will be most of them).

Cool. Look at that. It's the daily Bluesky post. Is it my turn tomorrow?

[–] BlazarNGC@lemm.ee 3 points 1 week ago (5 children)

All hail NOSTR protocol 🫡

[–] iopq@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's even less cost to switch it there's nothing to switch

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That's why some people just create their own instances.

[–] iopq@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Yes, but I didn't, despite running several of my own servers it's extra time I get little return for

I don't even know what nostr relays I'm using

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

No good clients.

And no clear intended usage scenario. That's also why IPFS is not very popular.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Sticking your neck out always has the risk of having your head lopped off. But if you never stick it out there you don't see the light

load more comments
view more: next ›