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

Gabriel Pettier

@taylorlorenz it's not owned by billionairs, it's not owned by anyone. if more time, get to the community of communities thing, how orgs can own their content on it and not depend on others, and still be part of the network, as anyone else.

i think people focus too much on the added complexity, not enough on what this complexity buys us.

Tom Robertson

@timbray @taylorlorenz Plus one on the email analogy. Email is about as complicated as Mastodon. Email has its problems just like mastodon but it’s still a remarkably useful and resilient tool that no one company controls. I can email anyone from any email provider. I can’t say the same for social media.

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

izzy 🇨🇦 | Technically Good ✨

@taylorlorenz

- no ads.
- no ad tracking!
- no billionaire owner.
- no "responsibility" towards shareholders (read: line must go up)
- the different platforms interact!! You can follow someone's photo sharing account (say, pixelfed - "Instagram", kinda) from your Friendica ("Facebook," kinda) account. #interop is cool

#fediverse

punIssuer

@taylorlorenz 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 https://pluralistic.net/2024/12/14/fire-exits/

Dave Ackley

@futurebird @taylorlorenz
"federated network" has some nice flavors (currently the word "federal" notwithstanding), and sets folks up for this fine fediverse of ours.

Stumpy The Mutt

@futurebird @taylorlorenz This nerd was going to mention @scream, but it won't.

Endless Screaming

@StumpyTheMutt AAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH

Davey

@taylorlorenz 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.

AJ Sadauskas

@futurebird @taylorlorenz @lienrag 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.

Gaëtan Perrault

@taylorlorenz

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

Mike_V

@taylorlorenz - On the fediverse, you're not the product. The sucker product.

Keeper of the orb

@taylorlorenz 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!

Gaëtan Perrault

@taylorlorenz

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. //

Keeper of the orb

@taylorlorenz oh also you can turn OFF displaying numeric data on your profile and posts. never fixate on your follower digits unhealthily again!

utopiArte

@taylorlorenz

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.

Tim Chambers

@taylorlorenz 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.

Tom Roberts

@taylorlorenz

I reckon the federated nature allows each instance to balance the social media aspects appropriately:
- funding
- moderation
- connectivity

These are all determined instance by instance.

So if one finds a good instance that supports their style, and contributes $ to its upkeep, then it will provide everything one could want.

Janeishly

@taylorlorenz Billionaires don't own it, and they never can.

Die Kehrseite zu Ostern

@taylorlorenz the fediverse feels like the neighborhood of better days. When you ask for help, you get it. When you need support, you get it. You can share and discuss your thoughts, learn and improve. This is media becoming social. This is how it should be.
Community not business. This is the real thing.

Wandering Adventure Party

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