mastodon - Link to source

I’ve been asked on TV hits and interviews lately to explain why decentralized social media is better, especially re: Mastodon.

How would you explain the benefits of a platform like Mastodon and the fediverse to someone in just a few sentences? How would you make the argument that platforms like Mastodon allow for more free expression than big tech controlled apps?

Would love to hear people’s thoughts! Trying to make my arguments most effective

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

David J. Atkinson

It is all about choice. As a reader, I see only what the people I follow post, plus what they boost. Not what some marketing algorithm thinks I should see. As a writer, it is about being assured that my followers have a chance to see my posts. No guarantees, but I’m not paying to be seen.

reshared this

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Katrina Katrinka

It might be useful to reference the recent news on censorship on TikTok and BlueSky and Threads and Instagram.

I like my instance's rules, but if they ever change, I can keep my name and followers and just switch instances to one where I can continue as I have been. I don't have to worry about who owns the gated garden I'm allowed to interact in or how they feel about our demented dictator's whims from minute to minute.

It's more stable. It's also more international. I know what other people think around the world.

reshared this

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

william.maggos

the magic of this place is that it gives the people all the power over what info, ideas and art gets attention. not governments or billionaire owners of media or corporate platforms. (not sure they'd want to hear that)

the problems with social media come down to the algos, not social media itself. that's what we're proving. the algos push a tabloid culture cause they know we'll pay attention to junk, even if we'd never share it. so they push the junk and our culture dets debased.

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

.:\dGh/:.

Basically, "having a small Twitter or Facebook". Most of these do not have ads, manipulative algorithms, or hidden agendas.

Like a any web application, tech savvy people are in charge of hosting it, but its easier nowadays.

Being decentralized like a spider web, you can still interact with people from other Mastodon servers, or even people from Threads. That's "The Fediverse".

Some may focus on particular interests or groups, making it easier to interact with other people.

This entry was edited (3 days ago)
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

joel b

easy. I can explore whatever shows up on my feed without worrying about it showing up in my ad portfolio. It took time for this is sink in. My curiosity or lack of ability to understand what a link is before a click it no longer punishes me by assuming that I am now into whatever that was. It's like getting out of an abusive relationship when they question everything I do.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Sam Van Horne, Ph.D.

Nothing new really--just that we make the algorithm with boosting often and following widely. The effort I spend in getting into streams of content is worth the satisfaction of enriching multiple aspects of my life. Knowing that a billionaire cannot ensh*ttify this is also a big plus because the present-day game plan seems to be billionaire + media outlet = ashes.

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Duckbilled Plattypus.

We're like a global NPR : each instance (thousands. of all sizes) is its own local radio station producing or relaying all kinds of content (local, national, global content), with free access to any other station's content through a voluntary federation. No ads, no corporations, no skeezy Nazi screwing with your feed to force a disruptive fascist content down your throat when you just want to tune into the ant station or climate change or German elections or jokes or cats or get live updates on the ground from Minneapolis. We exist beholden to no one man or corporation. And there's still a refreshing earnestness here. The meanness of X is not our vibe.

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Quantium 40

Use simple examples:

What if an instance admin dislikes you?
-> Fediverse: Get banned from one instance; change instance; reconnect to your friends.
-> X: Get banned from X; be lost.

What if the owner of a server wants to spread their world view or influence elections?
-> Instagram: Algorithm changed; Propaganda gets boosted; noone sees other opinions
-> Mastodon: People curate their timelines and decide what they see

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Rocketsoup

- Top of my list: it's not profit driven. That changes the entire incentive structure of everything.
- It's my data and I can move it elsewhere freely if I don't like my server.
- No algorithm burying my voice.
- It generally just self-selects a different userbase. Less performativity, less clout chasing, less drama. We aren't sexy or popular, and that attracts different kinds of folks.
- If I don't like how it works, I can (and have!) changed how it works.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

glitchsoc - Link to source

aburtch

Maybe frame it as similar to solar power?

Imagine a community solar grid as the Fediverse. So if the electric grid (corporate social media) goes down or gets enshitttifed by Nazis, you are protected from that since your instance runs on community grid without an owner and the rules are set by that community, so you can kick out bad actors.

Also, similar to social media, the solar communities can be connected together and share energy (information) and if one community goes down or turns bad (becomes a nazi bar) you can disconnect it easily and preserve your community.

Just thinking out loud…

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Pete Prodoehl 🍕

Real quick off the top of my head I usually say the Fediverse is not controlled by Billionaires, can't be bought/sold or controlled, isn't filled with ads, doesn't track you or try to sell your information, isn't filled with Nazis (they are on their own servers and I never see them because they are blocked) and there's not an algorithm trying to feed me crap I don't want to see.

reshared this

in reply to Mastodon

mastodon - Link to source

Monique

@Mastodon I especially prefer how my timelines are in chronological order rather than some random order based on algorithms no regular user understands. Also, Mastodon allows the use of third party apps, so I can pick one that best suits my needs as a blind user. Most of the other big tech companies no longer allow this. And their native apps or websites are not very user friendly to me.
@Mastodon
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Lynn D 🇨🇦

no algorithm and no ads means that you get to see the posts from the people that you follow, not who The Algorithm dictates. You can also move to another instance if
without losing your followers, and if your instance is federated, you can “talk” to all of the other federated instances (that last one is something that I have had to explain to several people who have somehow been given the impression that you can only connect with people on your own instance).
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

💡𝚂𝗆𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗆𝖺𝗇 𝙰𝗉𝗉𝗌📱

The media in this post is not displayed to visitors. To view it, please go to the original post.
- Community-driven, not profit-driven
- chose instance with rules that suit you
- the "for you" feed (list), that is actually made by you
- follow many other services/blogs from the one account (Pixelfed, Lemmy, etc.)
This entry was edited (3 days ago)
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

GhostOnTheHalfShell

The most concise way I describe the difference between commercial algorithm based platforms versus the fediverse.

In the former, you are presented with the illusion of a town square, it propagates content based on spectacle and “engagement”

In the latter, people are the algorithm as members of distinct communities, moderated by real people.

1/2

This entry was edited (3 days ago)
in reply to GhostOnTheHalfShell

mastodon - Link to source

GhostOnTheHalfShell

Centralized, commercial and algorithm based platforms are centralized command and control platforms.

The fediverse is a constellation of everything from individually hosted servers to the larger instances like mastodon dot social, and everything in between.

I would ask people to consider where do you think the greater liberty resides?

We have seen the kind of censorship that emerges on all of the large commercial platforms. It’s not possible in the fediverse.

2/2

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Lord Tom Klopf of CZ

(Part 1)
because believe it or not, groups of people need some isolation from each other. People are angry and want to kill each other because they were all put into the same social forum on facebook, twitter etc. There are simply incompatible world views that if forced to co-exist, people literally they want to kill each other. Also don’t forget what Facebook did in Burma (different topic).
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

akkoma - Link to source

lukisko

I would say that we can observe big US tech media. If there is anything which points to problems in the US governments, the government forces them to remove it. The same also applies to the individual companies which enforces their own censorship - "if CEO is not happy with it it may get removed" (or if there may a an issue with removing it directly, the suggestion algorithm will never pick it)
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Johanna Janhonen

Ok. An Instagram influencer was complaining about the awful comments she keeps getting and that make her want to stop. I told her it's partly because of the platform. Meta loves drama, it makes people to consume more time there. So they do not have reasons to stop bad behaviour.

On Mastodon people do not harrass others, at least on the Finnish bubble I'm in. If they would, they would be kicked out.

In Finnish school the kids that are being heavely bullied need to changed the school. Here it's the opposite. The bulliers need to find a new instance for themselves and that may be difficult.

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

JWcph, Radicalized By Decency

No ads. I think that's a highly convincing argument for many people & it's directly tied to decentralization: The fediverse is basically social media before algorithms & thanks to decentralization, if anyone wanted to add any kind of algorithmic reach functionality, everyone else would be free to ignore it - and without an algo, there's no business case for advertising in the 'verse.

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Guy LeCharles Gonzalez

Curious what finally won you over?

For me, it was an opportunity to reboot my relationship with social media in general, approaching it fresh, but having nearly 20 years of knowledge about all the ways it can go wrong.

I don't talk about decentralization. I just focus on my feed showing me only what I choose to follow, and enjoying the interesting people I've met here since 2022.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

7sleepersmusic

For me it's simple: people are nicer, people are smarter. IDK why, maybe 'cuz there's no algorithm amplifying the most outrageous hot takes, and no billionaire owners shoving their agenda down our throats. IMHO "free expression" means different things to different people. You can spout Nazi garbage on Mastodon if you want, but you probably won't get a wide audience. But if you have a reasonable comment to contribute to a conversation, there's a good chance you'll get heard here.

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Ben Royce 🇺🇦 🇸🇩

don't appeal to high mindedness

sell it

- no ads

- choose a server that fits your style, no one-size-fits-all straightjacket

- zero privacy defilement

- immunity to some racist edgelord techbro coming in, buying the thing, and turning it into bigot and ignorance paradise

reshared this

in reply to Ben Royce 🇺🇦 🇸🇩

mastodon - Link to source

Donald Clark

@benroyce I would add

- I only see who I explicitly follow (no feed stuffing and manipulation).
- I can migrate to a new home seamlessly with low friction
- as each server sets its own policies, there is no risk of a central, single, set of beliefs controlling everyone.

@Ben Royce 🇺🇦 🇸🇩

reshared this

in reply to Donald Clark

mastodon - Link to source

SlightlyCyberpunk

I think there's another side to the lack of centralized moderation too -- it removes a lot of the "too big to fail" mentality, and in doing so actually allows more moderation.

We've got Twitter over here producing and distributing CSAM, and so many people and institutions *still* won't block or remove links to Twitter purely because of its size.

So you do get more freedom here, but at the same time you get stronger and more fair regulation. Regulation designed for your community instead of for global politics. For example, I follow accounts that post pornography, which would never be allowed on corporate socials. Yet it's all hidden behind appropriate CWs and such. Meanwhile back before I left Facebook I was getting random unsolicited hardcore porn just popping up in my feed a couple times a week! They'd remove it eventually, but not before it popped up full screen while I'm standing in line at the grocery store or something...

This entry was edited (3 days ago)
in reply to SlightlyCyberpunk

mastodon - Link to source

Ben Royce 🇺🇦 🇸🇩

@admin @dsc

on centralized #socialMedia, #moderation is just a cost center

why spend the money?

why squash #bigotry and #ignorance? it's a hassle

in fact, such accounts create drama, which drives eyeballs and clicks in outrage, thus increasing engagement, thus selling more ads

so they go "FrEe SpEeCh," a lying dodge

toxic as fuck. completely irresponsible

just another reason why corporate social media is and always will be rat poison and why everyone needs #mastodon

#mastodon #socialmedia #bigotry #ignorance #moderation @Donald Clark @SlightlyCyberpunk

reshared this

in reply to Ben Royce 🇺🇦 🇸🇩

mastodon - Link to source

Alex@rtnVFRmedia Suffolk UK

@benroyce @rk @futurebird there's not only ants but literally every creature in the World (Fedi is particularly good for those interested in nature)

I've seen folk send pictures of lions etc that are sleeping in the main road (so everyone has to slow down and stop for them) as they live in countries where these are native, as well as just about every type of bug / snake / spider (folk do at least generally use CWs for those so others aren't scared if they have phobias), and nature scientists often post free links to whole full colour books of various creatures (I got one of all the snakes in Malaysia a few months back)

@Ben Royce 🇺🇦 🇸🇩 @myrmepropagandist @rk: it’s hyphen-minus actually
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Stefan Bohacek

I just think it's great that you can get together with a few of your friends and run a Mastodon server for a few bucks a month.

Together, you are an independent entity, you set your own rules, but you are also part of something bigger, you can connect with many communities and individuals that the fediverse is made up of.

And that is pretty neat.

Mastodon Migration reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

stux⚡️

Let me give this a try from a non-admin perspective.. 🤔

The Fediverse is a place on the internet where you can still meet interesting people from all over the world. Instead of uploading your contacts and following the same people over and over, on the Fediverse you discover new interests, info, help and support and everything you need in a HUMAN social network!

Sorry if it's a little long but im sure you can make something out of it! 💕

reshared this

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

glitchsoc - Link to source

Elena Brescacin

@tchambers You're not forced to use a specific website or a specific software to look at it, and then use it. Explaining what's federation and what's decentralization is very complex, especially to someone who uses internet passively - without knowing how it really works.
I always say that Fediverse is very difficult to be communicated, rather than used. You can't avoid explaining what "decentralization" really means. Despite blackout and similar stuff are more frequent, they don't see it as an immediate concern.
I always say that communicating Fediverse is like talking about U=U (Undetectable Untransmittable) referred to HIV prevention.
It's a very important concept for everyone's sex life. As it means that if you live with HIV and are in constant effective treatment, even without condom you can NEVER transmit virus to anyone. This destroys all 40 years old stigma we have, theoretically.
But you can't really explain this concept of UNDETECTABLE without explaining (at least the basis) of what VIRAL LOAD is. A concept that you can't give for granted.
@Tim Chambers
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Juan Per¢ent,🇲🇽 🍉,🇻🇪

Imagine a world without politicians, billionaires and bosses running everything, abusing everyone.
No ads and no algorithm.
Add a high signal to noise ratio.
On arrivsl you can move into the neighborhood you like best, and pay the rent you can.
Now take that world online, make it a social network, better, a social community.
You get Mastodon

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

George B

A lot of people complained when Instagram first switched from a chronological feed to an algorithmic one.

But I think the way forward for the fediverse is communities moving here wholesale like the forkiverse server did.

I don't think people will make accounts here otherwise unless they're the kind of nerd who's interested in this (in which case selling it is easy) or they have network effects which take a long time to build up.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Erotic Mythology 💘

Sensitive content

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Laura

The most important part for me is that this is not yet another "cloud app" where one entity controls everything: your account, what you see, the client applications, etc., but a protocol, where you can use whatever compatible software you want, even multiple.

It makes feature rollout difficult, but it's a massive safety feature in my opinion. If Mastodon gGmbH did something highly unpopular, all this software can feasibly choose to ignore it. They *cannot* force it on everyone.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Rob Ricci

On the old centralized platforms, everyone's in the same building with the same landlord, if the landlord is shitty (of course they are) everyone suffers. On decentralized media, there are tons of buildings with different landlords, and you can even build your own house. If your landlord sucks, you move.

reshared this

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

PeachMcD

IMO the 'free speech' trope has been used to flood billionaires' platforms w hate speech & AI-generated deepfake porn that isn't tolerated on my Fediverse server

I'm here less for freedom TO spew whatever I want & more for freedom FROM algorithms, ads, & someone's profit motive determining what I see. I'm here for Solidarity & Movement Building & learning from people all over the world like @pluralistic & @popcornreel & @StillRise1967

Also for #CatsOfMastodon & #HashtagGames 🙆🏻‍♀️

#hashtaggames #catsofmastodon @Cory Doctorow @Omar Moore
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Matthias Rex 🦣

Because independent app developers can add features to decentralized social networking that vastly enhance the experience. Both the ability to follow hashtags and timed mutes are absolutely genius and are the reason I'm not on Bluesky. What new, totally kicksss things are going to be created for the Fediverse next week?

Lorraine Lee reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

hometown - Link to source

an interesting bean

I see a lot of good responses. One contextual element is who is asking, and I think there are good answers that fit more for organizations. You can build a media platform that no one can take away from you. If you share a link to your post, no one will see a login wall. If i were an org, news outlet, or something like a very socially engaged regional music collective, i think the robust control of your platform actually means something important.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

myrmepropagandist

There are no ads.
There are no bots*
There is no secret algorithm controlled by strange billionaires and/or creeps trying to push agendas**
It's really fun and interactive and you meet great people, real individual people.

*Ya'll are such nerds you are going to bring up the good bots that we made and like, but you know exactly what I mean by this.
**ant propaganda doesn't count I'm not that rich either

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

myrmepropagandist

I get why they call it a "decentralized network" but that description was kind of a turn off for me before I came here because I thought you were trapped in a little server with a few dozen people and what's the point of that?

The power is decentralized but the communication need not be. You can talk to anyone from any community. You can have all of those fun instances of cross pollination when different communities intersect.

The more the fedi grows the better this gets.

reshared this

in reply to myrmepropagandist

mastodon - Link to source

Lien Rag

@futurebird

Apparently the mastodon team at FOSDEM had a really killer slogan for promoting the Fediverse : "My friends are not for sale".
Mic drop, really - what more is there to say ?

(though, depending on the audience, "Seize the memes of production, join the fediverse !" can land well too)

@taylorlorenz

@Taylor Lorenz @myrmepropagandist

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Lien Rag

gotosocial - Link to source

AJ Sadauskas

I'd separate out what the benefits of the Fediverse are from what it is. Because they're not necessarily the same thing.

The benefit of the Fediverse is there's no paid ads, and no boosted posts.

A benefit of the Fedi is there's very little corporate spam.

A benefit is the lack of AI slop.

A benefit is that you are more likely to be reading and responding to actual people.

A benefit is that it's community owned, rather than owned by a big tech conglomerate.

A benefit is that it exists primarily as s space to facilitate discussions, rather than sell advertising.

A benefit is that there's no algorithm that's highlighting the most controversial and hateful content in a bid to maximise viewership.

All of those /benefits/ flow from what the Fediverse is.

And what it is, is a network of self-moderated online communities. What you post on one community is visible on all the others.

Now what that means is there's no single individual or corporation that owns it.

in reply to myrmepropagandist

friendica - Link to source

utopiArte

@myrmepropagandist

Visiting her toot on mastodon.social itself, there are quiet a few answeres visible.
If I remember well, the comments by this profile still showed up in her last toot a few days ago that mentioned tictoc.
(perhaps I shouldn't have pointed out indirectly to another commenter that she never answeres to anyone)

The comment by this profile, including some mindmaps about the fedi, was shared by another profile located on mastodon.social, so in any case I guess it's only muted by her. I suppose blocks wouldn't federate at all.

@myrmepropagandist
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Diana Barbosa 🇺🇦🇵🇸

I usually start by explaining the chronological feed with no publicity; then, that it's not a platform, but a software run in many different places, so there is no one owner; then, I circle back to the fact that there are no algorithms choosing what you see on your feed.
I have the feeling I'm not persuasive enough, so I would love to hear other strategies.

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Diana Barbosa 🇺🇦🇵🇸

mastodon - Link to source

myrmepropagandist

@diraquel
Yeah I low key hate the chronological feed. I wish I could customize it more and design my own algorithm so I didn't miss posts from people who don't post frequently, for example.

I will take it over an algorithm I can't control, however.

The big sell for me is no ads, including fake bot accounts that are just selling something or pushing something. Getting out from the bubble of influence of the worse people in the world.

@Diana Barbosa 🇺🇦🇵🇸
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

mcc

"Nobody controls the network. It's like email. If GMail loses their mind and starts inserting Republican propaganda everywhere, you might have to switch to Hotmail, but you can still use email. You can still email the people you used to email. It's not like you have to keep using GMail hating it more and more every day because this one single company is the only way you can email anybody."
in reply to Tim Bray

mastodon - Link to source

Tim Bray

3/3 Mastodon’s like email that way. Plus it does all the Post and Repost and Quote and Follow and Reply and Like and Block stuff that you’re used to, and there are thousands of servers and anyone can run one and nobody can own the whole thing. It doesn’t have ads and it won’t. It’s dead easy to use and it’s fun and you should give it a try.

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

hannah aubry

Mastodon is the anti-influence platform

On the social web we are
- free from the influence of megalomaniacs or any one person
- free from the influence of VCs and profit motivations
- free from the influence of algorithmic manipulation

Plus as a bonus, you can follow a friend's "Instagram" from your "Twitter" account ✨

#Fediverse #Mastodon #SocialWeb

#fediverse #mastodon #socialweb
This entry was edited (3 days ago)

reshared this

in reply to Æ.

mastodon - Link to source

hannah aubry

@Æ.
in reply to hannah aubry

mastodon - Link to source

Æ.

@haubles it's true that you can move instances when you want, but that's also a very clunky process that puts a lot of people off. and then there's the whole anxiety over losing connections because of how instances are or aren't federating with each other. So I don't think "you can just move" is as simple as people often claim it is.

And it's not just an issue of having to move instances. The relationship people have with their admins can also be a very unhealthy parasocial one.

@hannah aubry
in reply to Æ.

friendica - Link to source

Lorraine Lee

I see instance/account as analogous to a landlord/tenant relationship. The single-user instances, I suppose are the homeowners. Self hosting costs money. It's small money, but it's money. I think the emerging wireless mesh networks have the right network topology but unfortunately have various proprietary softwares and firmwares in the stack, but it seems exciting, possibly more exciting than the fediverse.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Reinhard Lackner

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

glitchsoc - Link to source

Goth Jessica 🏳️‍⚧️ end ICE

WOULD YOU RATHER:

one centralized server run by a big tech company (eg. Meta)

minimal moderation in order to get as many people connected as possible, to monetize them $$$

minorities are collateral damage, constantly attacked and cast out entirely

OR:

millions of servers, self funded or running on user donations

millions of different forms of moderation

highly moderated spaces where trans people are respected OR users are ejected

AND unmoderated spaces for awful people

and most importantly, the ability to very easily move your account between all these spaces, to start over as a nasty or nice person

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

glitchsoc - Link to source

brib

In theweeklymiscellaneous.co.uk/p… I end up describing it as:

Mastodon distributes power. No one admin has control over the whole network, and while an admin temper-tantrum can disrupt the network, it cannot engulf it in the way that it can engulf Twitter or Bluesky. Instead, it is entirely possible to avoid the tantruming admin while still being on Mastodon.

This changes the incentives involved. Mastodon is easier to run out of a furry’s basement, so there is no incentive to raise huge amounts of venture capital money (and be beholden to what venture capitalists want). If anyone wants to enshittify their Mastodon server, users will pack up and move servers - this makes Mastodon incredibly resistant to enshittification. Since advertising is a form of enshittification, this means Mastodon is entirely ad-free - and by extension, it is surveillance-capitalism-free, because why do all that spying if you can’t have ads?


(1/2)

This entry was edited (3 days ago)

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

sharkey - Link to source

sodiboo

in reply to JL Johnson

mastodon - Link to source

Brett

@User47
This could work.

But I feel like in a lot of ways people only view the internet as some mishmash of TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, Netflix, and their banking app.

If you take away the algorithm shoving content down their throat they are TOTALLY LOST because they've literally never had to seek out things on their own that interest them on the internet before.

Those people are sadly never going to find a home on Mastodon as it currently operates. They physically don't have the pathways in their brain or a good enough understanding of what the internet is and how it works to "get" what Mastodon is offering.

@JL Johnson

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Marcial 🇨🇷🇻🇪

It comes down to what social behaviors are rewarded. On centralized platforms, we’re seeing algorithm changes that push people you’ve never met, products you don’t need, and news you can’t do anything about over the actual people in your lives, because that keeps eyes on screens, and on ads, and that makes revenue. In a decentralized environment, individual communities without profit incentive just focus on building welcoming spaces, the true goal of social media
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

friendica - Link to source

Preuss of the South @Dialektgefahr

@Taylor Lorenz
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Matt Boehm

I'd describe it as tradeoffs.

Would we use email the way we do if only Gmail people could email Gmail people? I think it wouldn't.

So email is better (not without issues like spam) because anybody can email anybody.

Mastodon/Fediverse provides similar benefits (and some problems) that "federated email" provide compared to siloed email.

I would argue the benefits outweigh the negatives.

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

iceshrimp - Link to source

🪨

Traditional social media is built to drive engagement and be addictive, making them a big part of Gen Z's social difficulties (they are literally being sued for it). Decentralized platforms without such algorithms bring back the feeling of community, providing a more tailored experience (choose your software, Mastodon, GoToSocial, Iceshrimp, etc.) without blocking connections. You can join a server based on your personal preferences (language, geolocation, hobbies...), and if you find a better place, you can freely move, without losing your connections.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Davey

some points

You aren't being manipulated by the platform or coerced into impulsive behaviour, although you can still trap yourself into it.

It's often a bit of a mess but it's "our mess", the sense of ownership has some legitimacy.

It only dies when people don't want it any more, not when investors want their payday.

The "low virality" means anyone is as big a deal as anyone else.

It's slower, but it's also more relaxed.

Being bad for marketing has its upside.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Tim Chambers

The open social web brings the same benefit the open web once did: nobody owns it, so nobody can take it away. On centralized platforms, your speech exists at the pleasure of a private entity's business model — they can change the rules, throttle your reach, or shut you down overnight. The fediverse puts that power back in your hands: you own your presence, you choose and build your own community with no intermediaries, and no single entity can pull the plug on you, or them.

reshared this

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Ehay2k

It takes more work on Mastodon to find what you want, but it's not actually hard. You just don't spoon fed similar things once you view a category of content.

And once you get going, you will get the information you want in your feed, and are always free to explore to find (and instantly add) new content/interests.

But NO SINGLE ENTITY controls your content.

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Data Quine

* it's easier to "find your tribe" of people sharing common interests or geography - broad by server, narrow by following hashtags.
* Can only speak personally, as a woman I''ve experienced by far the least harassment/spam on Mastodon of any platforms and any abusive accounts reported have been dealt with very promptly. Feels 'safer' than other platforms.

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

robotbrain

Social media is too important to leave in the hands of one of the billionaire assholes that can shadowban or kick you off with a whim if you annoy them or go against one of their pet causes.

There's no black box algorithm that the billionaires can nudge to affect your thinking or mood (as Facebook admitted experimenting on us with)

You're not held hostage to network effects after enshittification.

They're not trying to monetize your outrage and misinformation.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Texan_Reverend

Algorithm-free chronological feeds.

Ad-free.

Ability to follow hashtags and have those posts show in your Home feed which can foster communities.
(On many but not all Fediverse software)

No billionaire data extraction or "features" just to please investors.

No single entity can decide to shut it all down. Even if specific servers end up closing, users can migrate.

It can be messy or have issues, but there are often community-driven fixes or alternatives created.

This entry was edited (3 days ago)
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Wulfy—Speaker to the machines

Why not corporate #socialmedia?

1. Algorithm - pushes specific ideology, causes depression in young adults, distorts reality.

2. Owners propagandise their ideology (see above)

3. Certain voices are censored, just like in communist China. YouTube kicked off Aljazera news. TikTok US censors anti-#ICE sentiment, anti-genocide voices.

4. At election time, owners and the wealthy change the outcome of actual elections with social media.

If you haven't seen the outstanding #fediverse promo video by @_elena (4m)
Highly recommend it;

peertube.c44.com.au/w/tiwUDBzd…

tiwUDBzdYW8CWkNU1fgMqW

peertube.c44.com.au
#fediverse #socialmedia #ice @Elena Rossini ⁂

reshared this

in reply to Wulfy—Speaker to the machines

glitchsoc - Link to source

Tamtam

@n_dimension @_elena by the way, how do I find a peertube instance, that would host my channel and has better hosting than this example, we just saw?
Is it possible to make a living off of peertube? does anyone know anyone who does is? Like offering services on patreon and solely getting their audience from the fediverse, never posting on YT??
@Elena Rossini ⁂ @Wulfy—Speaker to the machines
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

M.S. Bellows, Jr.

I compare it to email: no one can force you to watch ads before reading your email. No one can buy emails.com and make it so everyone only gets Nazi emails. Why? Because email is just a protocol. No one owns email, and there are thousands and thousands of servers.

Mastodon is like email for social media.

This entry was edited (3 days ago)

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Looking for explanations…

The fact that is not run for profit means no ads, & no algorithms to drive engagement. Those algorithms direct us towards content designed to enrage, because that has been found to (generally) be more engaging. It also brings out the worst in people, provoking angry reactive responses, rather than carefully considered ones.

Whilst instances vary & more work is required on the part of users to curate their feed, the result is often a much kinder & more respectful place. Robust discussions can & often do still occur.

And the fact is that we simply don’t care about follower numbers. There are some people I often chat to because we follow the same hashtags, but haven’t got around to following. It’s about people & connections, not statistics.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

punIssuer

federated means, it's enshittification-proof!
Companies will always eventually treat their customers as badly as they think they can get away with. With centralized social media, the bigger it gets, the more are its users holding each other hostage, and the worse ads, moderation and general climate will become.
Being a network of communicating servers means, if moderation on your current one isn't to your liking, you can move to a different server while keeping your social graph intact.

Rehashed ideas taken from pluralistic.net/2024/12/14/fir…

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Gaëtan Perrault

I tried to answer your two core questions, "benefits" and "freedom", but really struggled to answer the questions as you posed them. I think the reason I got caught up on those answers is your use of the word "Platform". And when the general public think of "Platform", they immediately begin thinking of all those monolithic platforms out there.

Calling it "decentralized" doesn't really help. It's not a particularly precise term, nor do most people really understand the technical and social trade-offs that it implies. And "most people" includes a lot of people on Mastodon itself.

And we regularly see people who are disappointed when they get here, because they are expecting Twitter and they are getting something significantly different.

I think I can answer your two questions, next toot, but I think they need to be framed correctly first... /1

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Gaëtan Perrault

mastodon - Link to source

Gaëtan Perrault

What is Mastodon?

Mastodon is a miniature version of Twitter that anyone can host for themselves. You can host a copy for your friends, or a group of people get together and host a copy for their city or interest group or community.

What's special about Mastodon is that each of these miniature Twitters can talk to each other. So you can talk to people in other places from anywhere.

Benefits

When you sign up for an account, you are now a member of that community. You are not a User being fed an algorithm, you are a Member who gets to decide what you read and who you connect with.

Freedom

Because this is just software being run on your behalf, you are not beholden to the whims of some giant corporation. You and your community members are free to make your own community rules, to decide who you talk to. If you, personally, don't like some rule change, you can move to another community, or even start your own. You control big decisions. //

This entry was edited (3 days ago)

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

glitchsoc - Link to source

Keeper of the orb

you really have total control over what you see from others as well as what others see from you. and if a server is closing, or you just arent loving it there, you can literally import your follows blocks etc to a different one.

also theres a lot of academics and audhd folk on here so the knowledge base is deep and passionate on any random subject. clam science! pinball repair! mutual aid! cooperatives!

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

friendica - Link to source

utopiArte

The media in this post is not displayed to visitors. To view it, please go to the original post.

@Taylor Lorenz

Decentralized free open source guarenties censorship resistance and prevents #enshitification by design. That's what the internet was about in the first place.

If you only focus on #mastodon you miss the bigger picture. What happened and happens on twitter is just the tip of the iceberg.

The fediVerse puts people back into the drivers seat.

#mastodon #enshitification @Taylor Lorenz
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Rob

Think writing and books. Humans have had writing for millennia, books for centuries. But it was the printing press that democratized the written word. The pamphlet and broadside replaced the tome and codices. With the passing of the monastic requirement of manual copy, suddenly the voices recorded were not solely those at the pinnacle of power. Decentralized, in a very important way, means all of us.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Ben Zanin

fediverse platforms are like a table at the local weekend market: anyone can set one up, dirt cheap, little to no infrastructure, small audience, supported by other folks doing the same thing. Perfect place to sell your watercolours or canvas for support for adding speedbumps on that residential road that Uber has been directing drivers to take at 60km/h.

It's not Wal-Mart, it never will be, it doesn't want to be. It's different, and for a bunch of folks it's a lot better.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

mahadevank

i have a take with respect to police work and surveillance. With decentralized networks, digital surveillance becomes unnecessary and criminal circles can be tracked in the traditional way, by infiltrating their Mastodon servers.

Finding criminal networks in a large centralized network requires scanning every single message and networks s can't be found so easily because the volume of random interactions and noise.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

glitchsoc - Link to source

Cat!

Local moderation is engaged moderation. On Twitter (even pre-Musk) and other centralised platforms, moderation is impossible (or at least not cost-effective) to scale, so you get arbitrary decisions and systems that are very easy to abuse.

I got suspended from Twitter more than once for "hate speech" when in fact I was objecting to hate speech, while none of my reports for hate speech ever went anywhere. Here, not only can I much more easily find an instance with moderators I trust, but if they lost my trust I would simply move to a different instance.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Sven A. Schmidt

Imagine your social media posts are little articles in a newspaper. The newspaper decides what articles to promote and makes money off the ads around them. A person like Musk or Bezos can buy the newspaper and shape it to their liking.

Or imagine everyone had their own printing press and can publish their own papers, without any ad-based promotion. You’re free to move anywhere with your printing press and your subscribers are yours, and you can reach them wherever you set it up.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Vinay

It's a bunch of communities of users that decide how to govern/moderate themselves, with no billionaire owner nor algorithmic manipulation.

By default, communities can talk and share with other communities, but if a community starts producing unsavoury or illegal content, like Xitter's CSAM image generation, a community can decide to cut off contact with the problematic community.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Jürgen Hubert

I tend to argue with the infamous Enshittification cycle:

Commercial platforms are initially good for users until they capture the market. Then they make things worse for users in order to sell them out to other commercial interests. Then they make things worse for their business partners too in order to make more money.

Decentralized, non-commercial media avoid this trap:

They have no financial motive to make the user experience worse.

And if a specific instance does get worse, their users can move elsewhere and take their social media connections with them.

Thus, decentralized, non-commercial social media can actually get _better_ over time, while commercial "walled gardens" will only get worse over time.

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

haui

The fediverse and its largest apps mastodon, lemmy, peertube and pixelfed have corpoverse cousins that they replace. In this case thats twitter, reddit, youtube and instagram.

On the fediverse all these platforms work together and you can comment with one on the other. You also have actual free speech, meaning you have no central moderation pushing an agenda. You can move freely between servers and even start your own with the rules you deem best.

Thats my pitch to onboard folks.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

mkj

There are a lot of technical advantages (and some disadvantages), but for a single point about free expression:

There is no singular entity that decides what is acceptable to say, what gets promoted, what gets demoted ("shadow banning"), or causes your account to be deleted.

(Sure, there's a lot of abhorrent stuff you can post that will likely get your account or instance widely shunned, blocked and/or defederated. But it's not the decision of any *one* individual or company.)

@taylorlorenz

@Taylor Lorenz
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Unus Nemo

@Taylor Lorenz

I do not use Mastodon and if it was the only option, I would not be on the Fediverse at all. Thankfully it is not the only option.

As far as what I would say about the Fediverse's distributed nature. I would point out the benefits of not having one person, the owner of the centralized social media, make all the decisions. They might even force you to only have one type of Instance 😉.

There is a large range of benefits though the top is that no one person will ever control the Fediverse. It was designed to prevent that from being a reality. If a person wants to have someone else make all their decisions for them, then I guess centralized social media is for them. It is definitely not for me. I love the extended control over formatting and style we have. I love the way we can decide what gets propagated (by interacting with it) rather than having that central authority make the decision of what we should see propagated.

@Taylor Lorenz
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Whitney Loblaw

My take on it would be:

- no ads
- culture overall against AI slop
- no black-box algorithm
- you create a profile where the rules suit you, while still being connected to the rest of the network
- ... which means it somewhat reflects better how diverse we are. Not "one size fits all" behemoth.
- you can move if things change
- not designed to be adictive, milk your data and drain your wallet

Unus Nemo doesn't like this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Deborah Preuss, pcc 🇨🇦

@JonChevreau so many of the replies here are reactive: lists full of "no" and 'not' and "free from". It's like digging q big hole, with all the thrown-out descriptors littering the ground outside. It still leaves a hole, though; none of it actually describes the pleasure and value we *enjoy* on Fedi. That's harder to describe, but worth the time.

Describe how one *enjoys posts* in their feed. The pleasure of chitchat, discovery, new like-minded peers , slow thoughtful conversation

@JonChevreau 🇨🇦

JonChevreau 🇨🇦 reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

pelavarre

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

shellsharks

Not succinct, but I've documented a bunch of things great about ActivityPub/Fediverse/Mastodon here - shellsharks.com/notes/2023/11/…

Notably though, Fedi offers two things you can't get with traditional centralized platforms.

- Deplatforming / censorship resistance (you can't still be blocked by instances or removed from an instance, but you can always stand up your own and connect with the rest of the network that hasn't blocked you)
- Portability of your following

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Leave X - Protect Democracy

The Fediverse, and Mastodon in particular, showcases what social media can be when designed for democratic dialogue rather than profit.

It’s open source, so its rules and algorithms are transparent and accountable.

No single company owns it, so no billionaire can unilaterally shape speech.

It’s also interoperable, meaning people can move freely instead of being trapped in walled gardens.

Because it doesn't depend on outrage for ad revenue, it fosters healthier, more civil conversations.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

joemcl

Mastodon etc. are like a bulletin board on campus, or at work,
or City Hall, or a public library, and you don't need permission from your employer, school administration, government etc. to post on it, and they can't take your posted stuff down. A friendly volunteer makes sure that there's not really nasty stuff posted. If you don't agree with what the volunteer might remove, you can always post your stuff to a different bulletin board.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Rob

No "blue checks" are needed to prove account authenticity when the server instance is self-managed by a government/organisation/private-person. It's opt-in; you'll only see messages from those you follow, or what they boost, or from those on the same server. There's no single organization behind it with absolute power over the servers and it's data (no addictive algorithms), or that can suddenly change the rules after it becomes very successful.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

nodebb - Link to source

bumblefudge

Re: I’ve been asked on TV hits and interviews lately to explain why decentralized social media is better, especially re: Mastodon.

@taylorlorenz@mastodon.social fancy meeting you here! big fan, read the book and everything.

this isn't at all what you asked for, but i wrote an essay once that might be useful in more of a bigpicture/media-industry context.

you might also find to check out (or interview) elena, who is kind of our resident fedifluencer :revolving_hearts:

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Robotistry

Twitter was like being stuck on a cable news panel of people shouting at each other. Every interaction was fraught and involved people obsessed with correcting or reinforcing each other's opinions.

Mastodon is like a coffee break at a conference. Like walking through a constant stream of interesting conversations that I can drift in and out of without fuss or pressure.

I don't have to surf an emotional high as I scroll. People here read posts all the way through and engage intellectually and emotionally instead of only emotionally.

And I curate my timeline, so I can manage how much emotional exhaustion I'm willing to incur and I mostly don't get random crap that infuriates me or is designed to upset me.

There are still microbloggers, and there are moderation problems, but Mastodon doesn't track "influence" so I don't get many influencers in my feed.

It's restful.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

glitchsoc - Link to source

Tamtam

it's not trying to steer society towards fascism, All the algorithmic social media chucks far right content at you now, The algorithms have been tweeked to prefer it. They also block searches for "democrats" for instance . Or "Trump dementia". The CEOs have adopted the strategie to bring up fascist regimes so they will not be regulated. Also: Trump has people on the board of meta now.
Open source is our only chance at keeping a democratic society.

Lorraine Lee reshared this.

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Ian Williamson

“Imagine if all the world’s email, for individuals, companies and governments, was all controlled by just one company; even if the owner of that company wasn’t insane, would that be a good idea? What could go wrong?

And if things did go wrong, would everyone moving to alternative email services run by just a few other big companies, whose systems didn’t talk to each other, solve those problems? Or create new problems?”

Is what we have for email now better? Why?”

in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Etam

1) The goal of any company is to make money. Baking bread or providing digital platforms are different means of achieveing it. They all have a product and customers. In case of twitter or facebook, the customers are advertisers and the product is time users spend on their platforms. So in order to maximize their profits, they use algorithms, that maximize the users engagement. It doesn't matter if it's more funny cat videos or more fake news and extremist propaganda, whatever gets you engaged, will get amplified. The fediverse does not do that.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Evan Prodromou

1. Your company, university, or club can run a Mastodon server for itself, under its full control.
2. No one can tell you which apps to use or what kind of functionality it can have.
3. You don't have to chase friends or influencers from platform to platform. Set up a homebase on the Fediverse and follow them remotely wherever they go.
4. You own your contacts. No algorithm keeps you from seeing them, or them from seeing you.
5. Your server can be hosted in your country.
in reply to Taylor Lorenz

mastodon - Link to source

Alan Chen

Mastodon is based a communication technology where social media can be implemented in a more decentralized and independent approach. The approach ensures that no one company can take over the media, or go out of business taking the entirely of the social network with it. The longevity of this approach ensures freedom from singular control, and makes it more like email and less like myspace, vine, twitter, or many others.
⇧