John Oliver promoted alternatives to big tech in last night's episode, including Mastodon and Pixelfed
-
Why bluesky instead of mastodon?
Are you just commenting how the people who use something like twitter are eager to be herded like sheep into the next walled garden?
There is another interpretation. Calm down.
-
There is another interpretation. Calm down.
Err.. what?
Care to explain what that 'other interpretation' is?
-
It has its own charm once you get used to it lmao
The charm is why I keep coming back. Especially when it comes to the Lemmy Charm comments for lemmynsfw.com.
-
Really hoping legislators in Sweden don't force Signal to pull its services from the country. 🫣
Signal has been questionable for years. The way it's been pushed hardly, and how Moxie is emeritus, while much more questionable people are in control, doesn't fill one with confidence, and does ring some alarm bells. The relative proximity to some in the US establishment should be enough to do that. And the way some have been designating anyone who questions Signal as "Russian Propaganda" and immediately deflecting about how Telegram is bad, is even more curious.
Frankly, I would trust something like Wire more than Signal. And there are other options too.
Ideally, something with good security/privacy and is fully P2P would become popular. But those apps/networks never make it mainstream, which is unfortunate.
-
Don't forget Margot Robbie
The Picard Maneuver "Am I joke to you?"
-
We still shouldn't be doing the dirty work of rich people for them.
We should all be promoting Mastodon over the centralized and corporate-owned bluesky.
Talk to John Oliver then.
-
What legislation would do that? Would they want access to your messages or something?
They want to make crime fighting more accessible to the police...
-
I’m wondering this too People are hyped about bluesky but it is the same corpo bullshit that Twitter is. I mean it is literally by the same dude. Why fold?,
Didnt Dorsey already walk from it and gave the reason that it is headed the same way twitter is. Bluesky is being pushed by capitalists because it is a for profit company just like twitter and facebook.
-
Exactly! All a person has to do is to look around - the right buys up all popular media platforms and converts them to propaganda outlets.
-
Bluesky will be the next Twitter. Just give it some time
https://www.piratewires.com/p/interview-with-jack-dorsey-mike-solana
thats how its creator feels too.
-
Err.. what?
Care to explain what that 'other interpretation' is?
You are taking "replace Twitter" as an appellation, when in reality it was intended as a condemnation.
-
Talk to John Oliver then.
There are plenty of naive people on here also shilling bluesky over Mastodon.
-
There are plenty of naive people on here also shilling bluesky over Mastodon.
Over or in addition to? I haven't seen anyone say BlueSky over Mastodon.
-
Over or in addition to? I haven't seen anyone say BlueSky over Mastodon.
Get your eyes checked.
-
What about the dragon type?
That's all wyverns. Reddit is wrong.
-
Get your eyes checked.
For fuck's sake, no need to say ableist shit like that. I'm just saying I haven't seen it, not that 100% hasn't happened.
-
Bluesky will be the next Twitter. Just give it some time
mastodon is already the next twitter, bluesky is just a direct copy of it with nothing keeping it from going the same way. mastodon is open source (can't be corpoed), federated (can talk to other platforms/instances so being on a small one doesn't hurt anything), and most importantly, uses a protocol that doesn't make self-hosting impossible due to storage requirements.
-
I’m wondering this too People are hyped about bluesky but it is the same corpo bullshit that Twitter is. I mean it is literally by the same dude. Why fold?,
Bizarre that you and that other guy thought "will become the next Twitter" was some sort of praise. It's not.
-
Content moderation primarily serves advertisers
I'm lost, here. Do you not think fighting toxicity and hate speech is a valid and important function of moderation that's just as much or more for the sake of the people as it might be for advertisers?
I think that it's just words & images on a screen that we could easily ignore like people did before, and people are indulging a grandiose conceit by thinking that moderation is that important or serves any greater cause than the interests of moderators.
On social media that seems to be to serve the consumers, by which I mean the advertisers & commercial interests who pay for the attention of users.
While the old internet approach of ignoring, gawking at the freakshow, or ridiculing/flaming toxic & hateful shit worked fine then resulting in many people disengaging, ragequitting, or going outside to do something better, that's not great for advertisers protecting their brand & wanting to keep people pliant & unchallenged as they stay engaged in their uncritical filter bubbles & echo chambers.With old internet, safety didn't wasn't internet nanny, thought police shit, and stop burning my virgin eyes & ears.
It was an anonymous handle, not revealing personally identifying information (a/s/l?), not falling for scams & giving out payment information (unless you're into that kinky shit).
Glad to see newer social media returning to some of that. -
Bizarre that you and that other guy thought "will become the next Twitter" was some sort of praise. It's not.
I think it's more bizarre that you think "same corpo bullshit that Twitter is" is some kind of praise.
