Oddbean

@realcaseyrollins ✝️ The general conduct in most Mastodon instances is safe, I think it is indeed safe to say so. I don’t see that they will ever allow #Bluesky to be fully self hosted, where is the business model in that? Even the open source aspect is just faux marketing if they won’t accept any changes. Yes, Quote posting is in planned stage: https://joinmastodon.org/roadmap #Mastodon

Unpopular opinion, but put me on the deepest darkest fediverse instance and I feel safer than most big tech sites. Without the algorithm actively building lynch mobs of any variety, I feel like the people who disagree with each other can choose to block, mute, comment, repost, or ignore but there won't be any algorithmically created mobs rolling around. Most "viral" posts you could fit the people who interact with it on an Airbus a380, rather than a small country. Without the algorithm keeping old posts visible, they're ephemeral, soon drowned out by the next interesting post. I guess it's a two sided sword though, the reason many of the celebrities ran back to Twitter in a few days is they can't get arbitrary positive attention from an algorithm either and they need to achieve engagement like any other person. You can't even get your agent to buy follows because the number of followers doesn't affect who sees your posts.

@sj_zero @c6d0060b @realcaseyrollins ✝️ I get your point but I don't even want to know how dark certain corners of the Fediverse are and kind of doubt anyone would feel even remotely safe there!

@16555d14 I phrased that a bit wrong. What I mean is that how can anyone contribute when they don't have access to anything in the first place? And if people do, I'm sure they won't accept any changes since they won't match their objectives. They "publish" code like Twitter, but leave the core usable part out of it. It's all marketing. All pull requests are by employees.

@067cce20 Not what I said, but it is a nuance. I just answered to @16555d14's question about accepting patches. Open source by definition (Wikipedia): Open-source software is computer software that is released under a license in which the copyright holder grants users the rights to use, study, change, and distribute the software and its source code to anyone and for any purpose. Open-source software may be developed in a collaborative, public manner. If it's not usable, changeable, distributable, in my world it is not fully open source.

@c6d0060b @realcaseyrollins ✝️ As I understand it BS will allow self-hosting (own instance) in the future, but there is an index/lexicon - a means that accounts have to register with a central database by BS to become findable. The server software is not (yet) public, but could be recreated from the public protocol. Twitter has CW for images. M good at data protection, Tw less so, BS and Th a catastrophe. I don‘t believe that Tw, BS, Th meet GDPR, DMA, DSA, etc