If they are looking for a way to make money out of their work, it is. And it is totally fine.
If they could find ways in which both them and the artists could profit from music published on the platform that lacks the commercial potential to justify a €10 subscription, this would be a win/win
Flip the equation here. The subscription is something to fund development of the platform. So anyone that wants to have a viable libre alternative to Spotify that can be useful to all indie artists should consider paying for it, even if they are not intending to sell stuff.
as smaller artists would lose money every month by trying to position themselves in the market.
They are not “losing money”, they are making use of the service anyway. Any type of venture you are building incurs costs and risks, why should it be different for someone that is running an online presence?
If the developers of bandwagon were to carving exceptions for other users, pretty soon they would be taking the risks themselves of dealing with loss-leaders customers and would have to find other ways to make up for it. 10€/month is an absolute bargain for a service that will provide you a storefront and a distribution channel that can reach anyone in the world and demands absolutely nothing in return from you.
It’s for django, but take a look into my ActivityPub Toolkit. It is designed to be compliant with ActivityPub and not with any particular implementation, so it should be easy for you to adapt to your own needs.
I call it commitment and willinness to place your nuts on the line.
What skin in the game is required from someone to create an account on lemmy.world or mastodon.social? Conversely, what type of “bad consequences” is there for some admin that sets up an instance and fails to manage it properly? There isn’t any.
Instances provide governance in a natural, organic way
There is nothing organic about instances because there is no natural limit to how big they can get. The cost per user on an instance grows sub-linearly with the amount of users in an instance. This is why we are ending up with this power-law distribution and the majority of users go to the “flagship” instances and the minority spread around on micro-instances.
You are joining a social group. This is the natural order of things.
Social connections and the relationships are only meaningful if they have some shared context. Your family/extended family, the people you’ve went to school with, your swimming team mates, your co-workers, your neighbors, etc. But once we go past a certain scale (Dunbar’s Number) people start seeing individuals and just treat everyone else as interchangeable masses of crowds.
Don’t like it, or want to tinker? Spin up your own.
The absolute majority of people are only looking at social media platforms as a means to something. They don’t care whether they found the information they were looking for on Reddit, or lemmy.world or piefed.social. They don’t care if they are avoiding boredom at the subway by scrolling videos on Instagram, TikTok or loops. If we keep demanding people to understand the power dynamics each instance just before joining or tell them, they will just turn their heels over to the status quo.
Do we expect every single user to assess all of the toxic communities
No, I want users to have access to a list of pre-curated communities and let them customize it to their liking, like what Fediverser does.
In the same way that defederation is an admin-level decision impacting all of the userbase
Defederation is a bad way to manage conflict. It is a nuclear option that should be taken only when the offending instance (as a whole) is malicious. To stretch this “my server, my rules” philosophy further is bad design.
Good admins are like good janitors. They are not there to enforce behavior top-down.
I forgot that you are selective with your tolerance with hyperbole.
I mean features about customizing behavior (“Trump Musk filter”, “Vote weighting”) and the things where the data is publicly available but hidden only for admins, like “Attitude and Reputation scoring”.
It seems like every single one of those features are just settings that could (and should) be implemented client-side, and left up to the user who wants to have control over their experience.
Vocata is great as a concept, but not practical at all. Even the developer of the project agrees. If you know your way around Python and/or Javascript, you might be interested be interested in my ActivityPub Toolkit project, though.
As instances are currently structured, they are tied to web domain, and actually owned by somebody somewhere. That somebody has a level of commitment having setup hosting and configured the server itself, and likely to want to not lose their toys
In this system, the people that simply want to access the web MUST trust the server owner and the people that want to have full control over their identity MUST setup their own server.
This is complex, fragile, expensive and a huge barrier of entry. Just this week the admins of the second largest lemmy instance are closing down their server and 5000 people are left with no choice but to move on from their identity and find a new home.
Email doesn’t have that. The WWW doesn’t have that. Phone networks doesn’t have that. Bluesky doesn’t have that.
The communities were created, it doesn’t mean that they have people using them. I’m just hoping now that the people will be forced to move out of lemm.ee that maybe this change can be done to these topic-specific instances.
All these instances have been running for close to two years and are part of the “topic-specific” network of servers that I set up to help during the migration.
All these instances have been running for close to two years and are part of the “topic-specific” network of servers that I set up to help during the migration.
To be completely honest, my dislike of AP server software is not restricted to PieFed. I think all of them are an evolutionary dead end and I wish we stopped wasting our time trying to emulate closed social networks.
So what’s the point of voting since we don’t know its reasons ?
Don’t overcomplicate this. Voting is a way to collectively curate content. If it is relevant to the community and you feel the content is a positive addition to the community, you vote up. If you think it’s a negative addition, you vote it down. That’s all that there is to it.
that people prefer to post on other instances than yours.
This again?
Even if I had never created any of the topic-specific instances and I all I had was Communick as an user instance. How many instances have we both seem go down? How many admins have you seen showing up full of enthusiasm to burn out some months/years later? Why is it that my manage to keep my (few) users satisfied with the service? Why is it that I don’t feel overworked?
I’m not talking with other “people”. I’m talking with you. You raised every possible objection against what I am doing. Yet, it keeps growing. Slower than I’d hoped, but growing. It has been self-sustaining. But you continue to look for ways to discredit me.
If they are looking for a way to make money out of their work, it is. And it is totally fine.
Flip the equation here. The subscription is something to fund development of the platform. So anyone that wants to have a viable libre alternative to Spotify that can be useful to all indie artists should consider paying for it, even if they are not intending to sell stuff.
They are not “losing money”, they are making use of the service anyway. Any type of venture you are building incurs costs and risks, why should it be different for someone that is running an online presence?
If the developers of bandwagon were to carving exceptions for other users, pretty soon they would be taking the risks themselves of dealing with loss-leaders customers and would have to find other ways to make up for it. 10€/month is an absolute bargain for a service that will provide you a storefront and a distribution channel that can reach anyone in the world and demands absolutely nothing in return from you.
The menu has a link to the repository.
Maybe this kind of discussion will get more interested people on [email protected] .
It’s for django, but take a look into my ActivityPub Toolkit. It is designed to be compliant with ActivityPub and not with any particular implementation, so it should be easy for you to adapt to your own needs.
What skin in the game is required from someone to create an account on lemmy.world or mastodon.social? Conversely, what type of “bad consequences” is there for some admin that sets up an instance and fails to manage it properly? There isn’t any.
There is nothing organic about instances because there is no natural limit to how big they can get. The cost per user on an instance grows sub-linearly with the amount of users in an instance. This is why we are ending up with this power-law distribution and the majority of users go to the “flagship” instances and the minority spread around on micro-instances.
Social connections and the relationships are only meaningful if they have some shared context. Your family/extended family, the people you’ve went to school with, your swimming team mates, your co-workers, your neighbors, etc. But once we go past a certain scale (Dunbar’s Number) people start seeing individuals and just treat everyone else as interchangeable masses of crowds.
The absolute majority of people are only looking at social media platforms as a means to something. They don’t care whether they found the information they were looking for on Reddit, or lemmy.world or piefed.social. They don’t care if they are avoiding boredom at the subway by scrolling videos on Instagram, TikTok or loops. If we keep demanding people to understand the power dynamics each instance just before joining or tell them, they will just turn their heels over to the status quo.
Thank you for creating a community in a topic-specific instance!
No, I want users to have access to a list of pre-curated communities and let them customize it to their liking, like what Fediverser does.
Defederation is a bad way to manage conflict. It is a nuclear option that should be taken only when the offending instance (as a whole) is malicious. To stretch this “my server, my rules” philosophy further is bad design.
Good admins are like good janitors. They are not there to enforce behavior top-down.
I forgot that you are selective with your tolerance with hyperbole.
I mean features about customizing behavior (“Trump Musk filter”, “Vote weighting”) and the things where the data is publicly available but hidden only for admins, like “Attitude and Reputation scoring”.
It seems like every single one of those features are just settings that could (and should) be implemented client-side, and left up to the user who wants to have control over their experience.
Vocata is great as a concept, but not practical at all. Even the developer of the project agrees. If you know your way around Python and/or Javascript, you might be interested be interested in my ActivityPub Toolkit project, though.
In this system, the people that simply want to access the web MUST trust the server owner and the people that want to have full control over their identity MUST setup their own server.
This is complex, fragile, expensive and a huge barrier of entry. Just this week the admins of the second largest lemmy instance are closing down their server and 5000 people are left with no choice but to move on from their identity and find a new home.
Email doesn’t have that. The WWW doesn’t have that. Phone networks doesn’t have that. Bluesky doesn’t have that.
The communities were created, it doesn’t mean that they have people using them. I’m just hoping now that the people will be forced to move out of lemm.ee that maybe this change can be done to these topic-specific instances.
I will repeat my comment from yesterday.
the following communities have already an alternative on instances that I run
All these instances have been running for close to two years and are part of the “topic-specific” network of servers that I set up to help during the migration.
Yeah, that’s what I mean. I’ve written a series of blog posts about it.
Should I add an entry for metacritics or should you?
The following communities have already an alternative on instances that I run:
All these instances have been running for close to two years and are part of the “topic-specific” network of servers that I set up to help during the migration.
To be completely honest, my dislike of AP server software is not restricted to PieFed. I think all of them are an evolutionary dead end and I wish we stopped wasting our time trying to emulate closed social networks.
Don’t overcomplicate this. Voting is a way to collectively curate content. If it is relevant to the community and you feel the content is a positive addition to the community, you vote up. If you think it’s a negative addition, you vote it down. That’s all that there is to it.
This again?
Even if I had never created any of the topic-specific instances and I all I had was Communick as an user instance. How many instances have we both seem go down? How many admins have you seen showing up full of enthusiasm to burn out some months/years later? Why is it that my manage to keep my (few) users satisfied with the service? Why is it that I don’t feel overworked?
I’m not talking with other “people”. I’m talking with you. You raised every possible objection against what I am doing. Yet, it keeps growing. Slower than I’d hoped, but growing. It has been self-sustaining. But you continue to look for ways to discredit me.