What's great about using it (while it lasts) is that it boosts content to a lot of instances across the fediverse, so you don't need to be incredibly well connected in order to have reach. Otherwise, if you post microblog posts from Mbin, you risk yelling into a very tiny void.
I think it's likely we will see big platforms (newspapers etc) want to federate their content directly using activitypub. It sounds like a messy task, but if you can specialize in offering clutter-free activitypub support for existing platforms I'm sure there's money to be made.
One good option is to look for relevant groups in a.gup.pe - such as !technology@a.gup.pe. These groups are geared towards Microblog content, and give good reach on sites like Mastodon.
You can add pretty much anything before a.gup.pe, but some groups have many followers on Mastodon and some have none.
Lemmy and Mbin treat Microblog content very differently. Mbin is more similar to Mastodon in this regard, Lemmy tries to force-fit everything into the thread format. It's not very intuitive for new users - sorry about that! :)
I think there's a lot of high-quality content coming from a few impressively active users on here. I wouldn't want to be without it. Then again, each to their own.
But it seems wiser to me to just block whoever bothers you.
I'm Scandinavian, so I come from a country defined by workers unions in the post-war era. The Norwegian post-war social democratic agenda was defined by a group of socialists while locked in a nazi concentration camp. They were locked in there not for being centrist.
Recently, the labour parties of Scandinavia have moved towards the centre, so I am alternating votes between the socialist left party, the communists when it makes sense (they have a problem of ageing ML members, but their younger people are mostly fine), and the Greens. The Greens are in some ways further to the centre than the Labour party, but they have their reasons to compromise.
The labour party is, however, still left of centre. We're a representative democracy with four parties in parliament describing themselves as the centre, so it's not very hard for us to make the distinction.
And recognizing that capital can be a useful way of organizing one's economy under controlled conditions is different from capitalism.
The whole take is just stupid, and always made in bad faith. It doesn't take American relativism for social democracy to be a left wing ideology. The generations before me faught like hell against the capitalists in order to give me rights, and implying they were not leftists because the social democrats left the comintern is ahistorical.
Furthermore, there is no "to be fair" in relation to sending your political opponents to labour camps to basically have them killed. This is something tankies will never understand.
And Anarchists need to read about the Spanish Civil War and learn to keep the fuck away from tankies. I love you guys, but just because you're right on a fundamental level doesn't mean you can ignore history.
It did originate from Twitter. Somehow Twitter at the time considered it wise to split it into a separate entity, and Dorsey was fine with not controlling it. And then Twitter was sold, and Dorsey and Bluesky grew apart from each other.
I often see people say that pointing new users towards instances with a lax attitude to defederation is a good idea. I kind of understand the rationale, but I'm not sure I agree. Pointing new users to an instance federated with Hexbear seems to me to be a terrible idea.
It's a pretty bold move to launch an open source service like this, especially one that is as complex as a video sharing site. One would think a gradual increase of user base would be easier to handle than a sudden influx of people at a moment when one has been scrambling to meet a deadline.
Good thing they/he is not afraid of postponing the release and making sure it's ready. And if it works well it will be one hell of a release. Fingers crossed. :)
I think this makes a lot of sense. We don't want the instance hosting, say, football communities to be defederated anywhere on account of its users behaving poorly. In general there's just no reasons to have the users in the same place as the community.
I think this sounds like a good idea. A problem when starting a community is that one wants to find a stable home; it might make sense to set up camp at, say, hardware.watch, but without knowing who operates it it might feel more uncertain than lemmy.world.
And then, as a result, if lemmy.world ever disappears or has problems, it'll take way too many communities with it.
If these topic-specific instances had some sort of collective ownership, I guess we could more effectively guarantee for their continued survival, and it might be more tempting for existing communities to move over there.
I'd be interested in hearing the thoughts of some admins - would !football@lemmy.world be interested in moving to !football@soccer.forum, given the right organization?
And a piece of constructive feedback: Vague community names like !main@soccer.forum is probably less likely to attract attention than something specific like !nba@nba.space - when searching for a community, people look up the community name rather than the domain.
There's quite a few people who think the social web is a good term for what this is; websites talking to each other, allowing for two-way communication across platforms.
Not everybody loves the word "Fediverse". And then for those who like it, the connotations might be somewhat different.
You can't really do anything right in this field, as there are thousands of people ready to cry their hearts out at any given decision. But calling communication between web platforms the social web is not extremely controversial, and it's a bit easier to sell to a wider audience (government agencies, media outlets, people who don't know what HTML is) than going on an on about some obscure Fediverse. Different uses.
Oh no! Somebody organized to further the interests of the free and open internet, and they didn't invite me even though I was active on some IRC channel in 1995!
A lot of people use Mastodon as an RSS feed where they can leave comments. This would basically allow you to subscribe to the content of a writer, and get it full-form straight in your feed.
I could also imagine following artists on Pixelfed, throwing money in their tip jar to keep posted on their newest creations.
I think there's a lot of potential here. But monetisation is always tricky on the internet, of course.
I wasn't aware of this - good to know.
What's great about using it (while it lasts) is that it boosts content to a lot of instances across the fediverse, so you don't need to be incredibly well connected in order to have reach. Otherwise, if you post microblog posts from Mbin, you risk yelling into a very tiny void.
It'll be interesting to see how native group support in Mastodon is going to play out.