Migrated from @0x1C3B00DA
Relying on the competence of unaffiliated developers is not a good way to run a business.
This affects any site that’s posted on the fediverse, including small personal sites. Some of these small sites are for people who didn’t set the site up themselves and don’t know how or can’t block a user agent. Mastodon letting a bug like this languish when it affects the small independent parts of the web that mastodon is supposed to be in favor of is directly antithetical to its mission.
People have submitted various fixes but the lead developer blocks them. Expecting owners of small personal websites to pay to fix bugs of any random software that hits their site is ridiculous. This is mastodon’s fault and they should fix it. As long as the web has been around, the expected behavior has been for a software team to prioritize bugs that affect other sites.
This issue has been noted since mastodon was initially release > 7 years ago. It has also been filed multiple times over the years, indicating that previous small “fixes” for it haven’t fully fixed the issue.
If you break that up you end up with only a few large and likely advertisement funded instances being able to survive.
I’m not saying I don’t think instances should be able to use that model, only that I think that model should not be the dominant way of building a community on the fediverse. But I don’t see why a user would be less attached to a community just because its hosted on a different server from them, especially on the threadiverse which is topic based and where users are most likely going to engage in multiple topics.
Super disagree. A community at the protocol level can have just as much character as a community at the network level, but without most of the drawbacks. The “instance as community” idea was always a poor substitute for actual Group
s. The community shouldn’t be a server that users are bound to; it should be a Group
that has access controls and private memberships (if desired). The moderators get all the same benefits of maintaining a limited community with their own rules, but users aren’t beholden to petty drama via instance blocks or defederation.
It wouldn’t change that, unless the moderators of those communities agreed to merge them by using the same cryptographic identity.
I think you missed a key part of the article. Content Nation was not harvesting data from the fediverse; it was just federating. It was a new project that had just spun up and didn’t have a full feature set yet, but other than those missing features it was a normal fediverse instance.
deleted by creator
I think there needs to be some kind of discovery algorithm for new users with an empty feed (or even existing users who just wanna find something new) but a federated alternative doesn’t need something as powerful as the tiktok algorithm to be a decent replacement. It doesn’t need to surface a “never-ending flow of content” because it doesn’t have a financial incentive to keep you in the app endlessly.