Yeah, for one, I have no clue how to operate a node, so that's not going to work for me.
I've joined other servers, and it is a bunch of people posting into the ether, as if we are listening, yet no one is responding, liking or boosting. Boring as fuxk.
And the federated timeline is filthy, and requires a heavy blocking to clean up.
To my original point, there seems to be a reason your timeline is filled with NAS posts and responses.
Not to mention the main concern with NAS - the fact that its users are there to seek and enforce conformity. All I need to do is criticize NAS and you will see the "community" rising up to "defend it", to defend their "free speech platform".
The fact that the fiercest ones have no stake in NAS, invested nothing to sustain NAS, eludes most casual observers.
This cannot be any other way, all large nodes end up at the same point where the majority of "community members" are opportunists and abusers.
They should be kicked back and told to stay on Twitter, Facebook, Gab, Truth Social, WhatsApp, Reddit, Telegram, Snapchat, TikTok, WeChat, Instagram, Pinterest, LinkedIn, Quora, Discord, Tumblr, Flickr, and dozens more.
The Fediverse should be proudly operated by single-user nodes.
Huge nodes like NAS has nowhere to go but bust. Owner-operated networks like mine outlive them and outperform all of them. Especially when you are considering a REAL community like a condo association the nodes have a chance to last human generations.
Purpose-built networks sustain far longer than general, aimless nodes.
I worry about network traffic in terms of what a node might need to handle, sure, but unless there's something functionally wrong I am not trying to diagnose social maladies like a lack of specific types of interaction.
@Hoss@amerika@dcc@0@viber@FourOh-LLC NAS has been showing a lot of character lately, maybe it's the streaks of grey in my beard talking but most of them are pretty based. It shows with how hard they cause faggots to ree and whine like the hater in this thread.
The Fediverse is simply not designed for half the stuff Matt and his crew is doing. OK, lets take a step back and refactor.
How many times did NAS promote owner-operator status? I mean I made a thousand statement over the years about the Fediverse depending on owner-operators installing and using the software.. not just one of two mega-sized nodes but thousands of individuals.
Then what about all the "fallout" that keeps happening between all the crew, they lost noagenda and they will lose noauthority.
Let me spare you more of the same. I have a purpose here, and part of it is to remind you of facts and details NAS will never mention to you.
Again, I experienced the loss of the LUG, I was there for its full life cycle. Its not too difficult to foresee what is going to happen to the Fediverse when only ActivityPub and Mastodon left standing, with massive shitpoast nodes.
You don't understand, he just wants his AmericaFirst 50 states civil disobedience network and wants people to send him their Government IDs, he's not a political activist he's just a citizen rEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
What Matt was talking about was my efforts to bring people to the fedi, by giving them a purpose. The 50-state network is true, once I tried to create a 50-nodes network form DNS and up, it was a humangous effort and quite expensive.
This has evolved into TheRON, or the Residential Owner-operated Network. Its still evolving.
Shitheads like Matt take any piece of information they have and use it against people. That is why everyone is hiding behind anonymous, terrified of doxxing.
This is what happens when large nodes on the fedi, with hundreds of users overpower the lone owner-operator. There is simply no other outcome, this is the only result of large nodes.
The point is not that you are right or wrong, the point is that it will happen regardless.
>Nothing on the Internet is anonymous. IMO, embrace that shit.
You're so right bro, Thomas Paine should've published Common Sense under his real name and got beheaded because that would've been fucking based and principlepilled.
Under anarchotyranny it's not direct retribution from the system that you should be fearing, it's the insane antifa trannies that act with plausible deniability on behalf of the ruling class that you should really be worried about.
I wanted to double underline this. Anonymity is necessary for honest speech because (a) censorship targets unpopular speech and (b) realistic and accurate observations are often unsociable (!!!) and would cause the speakers loss of friends, business partners, wives, girlfriends, sheep, etc.
This is like an anti-advertisement. If you were running a "Who can sell the least amount of products to Hoss" contest it'd be really hard to beat the team with Google and Bill Nye on it.
But I won't live my life in fear of troons and thugs of the State, and I don't think other people should either.
I get the argument, and I don't fault anyone for making a different decision, but I do think things would be different (better) if people didn't feel that they HAD to be anonymous in order to say what they want.
It says in 3007 counties in all 50 states you need to create an owner-operated network using the Fediverse and Zot/Zap so you do not need to block anyone!
It means what it says, exactly. Today I would write that if you cannot reach the decision makers from the bottom, your organization is TOO BIG.
Remember when the Walkaway campaign was booted from Facebook, and Straka was sobbing like an idiot asking "who could this happen?!"
There is the concept of "six degree of separation", but in national-sized organizations you cannot reach the decision makers by a hundred-degree of separation. I know many people tried to warn WALKAWAY, they were literarly told to move from the platform of their political opponent! I did what I always do, try to reach them with introducing the Fedi.
That's what you are looking at, and early realization of a now crystal clear concept.
I hassle, I try, I take chances. I learn by doing. I did nothing wrong with that, or with anything else you might hang on hoping you can take it out of context and use it against me.
All I wrote was you are an activist. Political, intellectual, pacifist or pan-tis, pan-tat whatever. You "represent the tis and tat of other people", an activist.
I on the other hand just doing my civic duty, reminding people that taking control back begins at home, with as little as running their own Fediverse nodes. I do not even mention voting - there are more qualified people who should do that.
On the other hand, I'm not certain what you mean by "more". Fedi has recently passed 15m users and is getting pretty close to 30k instances: http://demo.fedilist.com/ . 56 new instances yesterday, apparently.
> Gab gets more focus than this place because it concentrates an audience.
Gab gets the focus because (1) it contains the currently accepted bogeyman and (2) it is a website and does not require a lengthy explanation about what "federation" means. I think you underestimate the impact of "requires lengthy exposition" on the media's attention, and their utter contempt for their own audience ensures that if they think it is hard to understand, they will not even mention it in a postscript to the story.
@istvan@PurpCat@amerika@dcc@0@eriner@viber@dj@FourOh-LLC@Hoss I think fedi does not work well for "audience"-style stuff. If you just show up and see people doing cool shit and then you talk to them and you ask them about their cool shit then you sorta end up where the cool shit is going down.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. The "average reader" does not matter to a news publication: their average reader does, but it is not something they can measure very well, and it will necessarily be skewed because their readers are a self-selected subset of the population.
If there existed only one newspaper (and newspapers were compulsory), then you could infer some things about that newspaper's readers from a national study. The nationwide average reading level would be relevant. Then say that we droop the requirement that all citizen read a newspaper: do you think the average reading level of people that read the newspaper goes up or down? Then say we add a second newspaper, but it is a tabloid that focuses on celebrity news and gossip, it's got a full page dedicated to horoscopes and the crossword puzzle is replaced with a jumble: do you think if you took a representative sample of both papers' readers, you'd get the same average reading level?
> The general public is one step away from sitting on a combination recliner/toilet and marathoning “Ouch My Balls”.
It's driven from the complete opposite direction. You build a burger joint and people that show up and buy a burger tend not to be vegetarians, you build a soy hole and you'll get a lot of vegetarians. If you walk into a restaurant and ask the guy what they serve and the guy says "As a member of the general public, that's for you to decide! What do you think we should serve? We're doing a nationwide survey. Until the results are in, we don't know what we serve; I have some cold potatoes floating in tap water if you're hungry while you wait."
There was a fairly good article in 2600 years and years ago (I think it made it into the best-of book), a journo basically wrote an apologia for why journos make the sort of mistakes they do, and the summary is "We have deadlines, so please say the important parts first if you are interviewed, and we can't put in anything if we're not sure enough that it's correct, we have limited column space, so we're looking for two or three sentences we can print, then the editor comes behind me and dumbs it down further", etc. (and that was the 90s, I think, maybe the 80s, but in either case, back when they did try to avoid printing things that they couldn't verify rather than cutting and pasting from Twitter), but he was very clear on the point, and I think the point is something anyone that has read their output could have guessed, but he described the average newspaper reader as an idiot. It doesn't matter whether the average reader *is* an idiot or not, but that the average idiot journo thinks he average reader is an idiot (and, for the last twenty years, journos apparently think the average reader is also extremely gullible).
This, of course, drives a feedback loop. Maybe everyone that keeps up with the news looks at CNN and MSNBC at least once in a while, because those are designed for mass appeal, but not a lot of people read Daily Kos or Mother Jones unless they are left of the typical democrat, not a lot of people read the Babylon Bee unless they're somewhat more conservative than a normie republican, because those are written for an audience of a specific type, and the readers that fit the mold are the ones that read. Then the publication gets feedback from their readers, or they tuck a survey card into the January issue, they spam you with a bunch of popups demanding your consent for extremely invasive tracking and buy a bunch of data from Google and sometimes Facebook, they get what picture they can of their audience, they write for that audience (because they have an idea of that audience; they do not have an idea of the general public), and the more they're willing to pander, the better entrenched they are in their niche.
So, you know, if the readers are idiots, it's because the journos write for idiots. atecubanos--vice_news.mp4
I didn't see the beginning of the thread, but probably, modulo whatever cultural whatsis, I mean, you were doing metal and I was at the punk rock shows.
> While the big show goes on elsewhere.
1975, the "big show" was in Vegas, but the interesting stuff was at the Whisky a Go Go. I can't fathom your insistence that the "big show" is Gab, which is not even Vegas, it's a honky-tonk a few miles outside of Atlanta where the lead singer for some band that once opened for Elvis is shitting his pants backstage because he drank too much to navigate his way past the drum kit to the mic, gave up, and passed out.
> needs to focus on a fifth-grade reading level or it cuts out too many people.
The underlying assumption, that cutting people out is necessarily bad because everyone needs to shoot for total global dominance or there's no reason to care, is a bad one. There is no way to produce most things that are useful if you think about it that way. I don't read Pitchfork or the Lancet but watering them down isn't going to make me start.
Papers vary, but the audience for newspapers in general -- which is now global -- needs to focus on a fifth-grade reading level or it cuts out too many people.
Maybe the WSJ has smarter readers; I would like to think so. But even they dumb it down a lot these days.
@p@amerika@dcc@0@eriner@istvan@viber@dj@FourOh-LLC@Hoss > but not a lot of people read Daily Kos or Mother Jones unless they are left of the typical democrat, not a lot of people read the Babylon Bee unless they're somewhat more conservative than a normie republican, because those are written for an audience of a specific type, and the readers that fit the mold are the ones that read.
Trust Me I'm Lying had a good point about the purpose of these websites: while they don't have the widest readership they have the most influential readership. In particular (since the book was circa 2012), he namedropped Gawker, Drudge Report (when he was still involved), Politico, Business Insider, HuffPost, and a few others throughout the book as such sites.
In particular, while they didn't have the largest readership, the readership was highly influential. The people reading these sites would be the sites the radio DJs and news anchors would repeat news stories from.
The same could be said about certain forums and internet communities that have influential people reading them, ranging the gamut from Kiwi Farms to SomethingAwful to whatever is left of imageboards to ResetEra (and before that NeoGAF).
@amerika@0@FourOh-LLC@Hoss@PurpCat@dcc@dj@eriner@istvan@viber The people that want fedi to be Twitter get disappointed and leave, because fedi is not Twitter. Whatever Twitter is, I have no use for it. I like this place, I have a use for this place, I can talk to friends.
@ins0mniak@0@FourOh-LLC@Hoss@PurpCat@amerika@dcc@dj@eriner@istvan@viber Oh, I do a southwest-style one, because I am from the southwest. Half pinto, half black beans, beef (usually chuck), onions, mushrooms, peppers, garlic, spices, about a tablespoon of molasses. Good on its own but if you dump a bowl of it onto some tortilla chips and then add some sour cream and salsa and shredded cheddar, it's like a nacho kit.
> There's a reason big social is kicking our asses.
By what metric? The people I want to talk to are here. There are more fascinating people here than I can keep up with. I care about that. I cook up a pot of chili, it's because I want to eat a pot of chili, and someone comes through and says "Well, this is too spicy to sell in huge numbers and it takes you too long to make it", the response--provided I don't freeze up trying to figure out why he's talking about sales figures--is that I'm not selling it. The broadcast channel, the "audience", I couldn't give a shit about that even if I had a mountain of cocaine. If I want to broadcast something, I've got blogs.
Your fundamental assumptions are off. Here is a pirated mp3, feel free to say some gamer words, attach a PDF. We can talk here. I don't know exactly when Twitter stopped being useful as a place to talk to people, but that was what I was using it for initially. Friends were there, I'd talk to them, that was fun. It turned into a mall. I don't want to sip an Orange Julius while I check out the sale at Tommy Bahama's, so now I'm here. This place *can't* turn into a mall. There's no way to control the message. So George Takei wants to posture about politics and a bunch of people suck his dick in replies that he doesn't read: this place is unsuitable for that, so they've gotta block everyone that doesn't play along. The place isn't Twitter, it's not Facebook, it's not like any of those places, and that's a fucking relief: I don't like those places. biggie_smalls_ft._thomas--come_on.mp3
Are you saying there aren't any? Having had to scrub them out of the DB to keep FSE afloat when Gab was federating (and hammering the shit out of us with botposts), I can say that the bots outnumbered the humans. fse
What is the difference between fedi and other larger platforms? It is literally that you can talk to anyone here, because they can actually see you. There has been many times where people came from other platforms to fedi. Where I could literally never talk to them there, because there was so much meaningless interaction directed at them.
People get addicted to the automated response, for their approved ideas. Almost none of them stay on fedi.
That has changed a little bit with this last wave from gab for poast and NCD. They seem to be losing the battle for their heart and soul, but if they do, at least they can be defederated.
> The cable channel, which touts itself as “the most trusted name in news,” drew just 83,000 viewers aged 25 to 54 during the week of May 13-19 from 8 to 11 p.m. — its lowest-rated week since 1991, according to Nielsen.
@amerika@0@FourOh-LLC@Hoss@PurpCat@dcc@dj@eriner@istvan@viber For a typical news-style newspaper, we can set aside that those are all owned by the same company now, but when print news was a bigger business, the partisan newspapers sold better (despite alienating half the market) than the watered-down papers. People want flavor.
@amerika@0@FourOh-LLC@Hoss@PurpCat@dcc@dj@eriner@istvan@p@viber Let me be slightly more helpful than that. I described a heaven banning situation. And, you want an example of an individual bot. But, my Turing test isn't good enough to differential between bots and people. So, what I am trying to say is, you are asking for evidence that doesn't exist, to prove an assertion that can only be seen with macro analysis.
That is to say, you've not understood the assertion, and asked for evidence that doesn't exist.
> A blank TL on a private node with no followers/followed makes it hard to find anyone to interact with.
Yeah. You have to start in a place. When I stood up FSE, I just imported my following list from the previous instance, timeline filled up immediately. (The bugout zone was even easier, of course.)
> i wish i could pay someone for hard drive space and i wish that the companies i give money to did not try to silo my data, though i will not stop giving them money if they continue to silo my data
No, he's still up his own asshole and still hasn't managed to say anything interesting or insightful. If you wanted to spend some time convincing him to move from fedi to Gab, though, that would be entertaining.