Does it feel like the fediverse is exclusively used by older tech nerds?
The mastodon and lemmy content I’m seeing feels like 90% of it comes from people who are:
-
~30 years old or older
-
tech enthusiasts/workers
-
linux users
There’s nothing wrong with that particular demographic or anything, but it doesn’t feel like a win to me if the entire fediverse is just one big monoculture.
I wonder what it is that is keeping more diverse users away? Is picking a server/federation too complicated? Or is it that they don’t see any content that they like?
Thoughts?
You are viewing a single comment
Yes.
Absolutely.
Literally the single biggest problem with fediverse adoption, brought up in every discussion about migrating to it. It will never replace centralized sites as long as it remains confusing and complicated.
https://www.reddit.com/r/RedditAlternatives/comments/14t9t66/im_so_lost_is_there_an_easy_mode_to_the_fediverse/
https://www.reddit.com/r/LemmyMigration/comments/145epgc/looking_for_a_lemmy_website_try_lemmyworld/
On Mastodon it's pretty easy. Download the official app and go through the prompts. They should probably have a little note saying "just go with the defaults if you're not sure" but this shouldn't be a road block for any normal person. The fact that Mastodon has a standard migration method makes this a low-impact decision.
Lemmy is definitely harder. "Jerboa" doesn't sound like an official app, and I don't think you can even create an account in Jerboa. So the first step is finding an instance on the web with no guidance. That's bad.
I still haven't joined Matrix because it's too hard. People say I shouldn't use matrix.org for various reasons (like bans without warning) but I can't find an alternative that seems sensible. All the guides I found are basically "you should really host your own, but if you're too much of a noob, here are some Polish lolicon-themed servers you can join". If it were possible to sign up without feeling like I'm doing something wrong, I would have many years ago.
Yeah with matrix it's really bad. I'm aware of a whole 5 matrix servers. matrix.org, the one that's run at my university, mine, and my 2 friend's matrix servers
Also all matrix clients are currently shit
So much this. The signups process desperately needs to be streamlined
I've been trying to decide what the best, smoothest, option is to make the fediverse "better".
I think that making a line between a "Fediverse client" and "Fediverse Server" is the answer. A client that can easily browse multitudes of servers, letting you join lemmy subs and follow mastodon accounts might be the answer.
I clicked it for you:
I've said it before and I'll say it again, defederation should be removed from the protocol. (And replaced with a default ban list that can be overriden by the user).
Each instance should basically just be a set of default settings that are used to access the same shared pool of content.
This removes the new user hurdle, because they can now join any instance and not be worried that they are making some important, permanent decision. If they find that they don't like something about the instance, they can tweak their settings later.
Also, some of the other solutions to this issue carry significant risks. Pushing users towards a 'default' instance increases centralization. Apps that are preconfigured to use a specific instance are even worse (since people wont want to change instance if it means giving up a familiar app). Without some degree of vigilance decentralized services tend to centralize over time. This gives too much power over the entire fediverse to a handful of instance admins. If an instance with 60% of all users starts defederating all smaller instances, most users will just migrate to the larger instance.
This isn't just some theoretical that I pulled out of my ass, its an easily abusable weakness of federated services. It has been abused in the past, and there is no reason to believe it wont be abused again.
Google used it to kill XMPP. Facebook will almost certainly use it to kill mastodon, once they siphon enough users and content to build a critical mass. Microsoft is so notorious for using this strategy that they has their own internal phrase for it: Embrace, Extend, Extinguish.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish
I like it here, but I feel like the community needs to rebrand already. "Fediverse" just sounds like something that'll never catch on
The official web ui is ugly and unbearable. I am on liftoff which is decent.
Makes sense, how would you resolve it without giving anyone centralized control to make Twitter or Reddit 2.0?
I think the best middle ground might be where there's a bunch of separate apps that all have their own default server, where they hide most of the fediverse complexity from the user. They'd still all be accessing the same content, but it would just be simpler for 'normal' users.
Yes, this is why I was never able to figure out getting an email address. Too many servers to choose from.
It's about as complicated as choosing an email provider.
Yeah, you can go with gorillamail, or just go with gmail/outlook like everyone who doesn't have a specific reason not to.
If you suggest to a new user anything other than choosing a big name instance, you're part of the problem.
Regular users are going to learn by experience, not theory.
I've spent all day trying to figure out the fediverse and I've read "it's just like email" about a hundred times. 😒
Yeah, you probably don't understand how email providers work either. You just use it and don't ask questions.
I do understand how email providers work, and Lemmy is not just like them. Stop saying this.
You can't post to Twitter from Facebook or vice versa, but if Facebook and Twitter were part of the Fediverse, then you could. Does that help?
Not to the average person, no. The fact that you have to explain this at all is the problem.
We could sit here and speculate about what makes sense to the average person all day, but at the end of the day it wouldn't amount to anything without evidence to back it up...user studies or something like that.
What I'm asking is does it make sense to you?
No, your analogy is not accurate. If Facebook and Twitter were part of the Fediverse, you might be able to post to one from the other, or you might not, depending on whether one had defederated from another other or not.
To extend the poor email analogy, it would be as if you had a Gmail account and tried to email a friend on Outlook, but you couldn't because Outlook refused to accept emails from any Gmail address, but you could get through to them if you sent it from a Yahoo address instead.
It isn't a perfect analogy. I doubt that any analogy is. I regard defederation as an advanced topic, though, and it isn't necessary to understand it to grasp the basics.
I don't understand your issue. It 100% could work that way as Microsoft could simply block Gmail requests because, I don't know, let's say they are constantly receiving malware from Gmail servers in attachments.
Email from Gmail to Outlook would fail but email from Gmail to Yahoo to Outlook would not as Yahoo to Outlook is not blocked.
Ok.