pull down to refresh

I’m not saying federation “won’t” work or “can’t” work. Merely that in 2025, nine years after deployment, federation does not work for the Mastodon use case.
One of the big selling points of Mastodon was that you can pick which instance your account lives on, but it is easy to change your mind and switch to a different instance later on. This feature was wildly oversold.
What other social systems call “direct messaging” is called “private mentions” on Mastodon, and it is simply the worst feature design I have ever seen in a mainstream technical product.
When you “private mention” someone, only you and they can see the post. And they can reply with a “private mention” of their own. But if anyone in that “private” thread accidentally mentions any other Mastodon account by name, that is itself considered a “private mention”, and that person is invited into the thread. It is an absolutely insane UI design that makes it extremely easy to share private conversations with exactly the people you don’t want reading them.
I really enjoy Bluesky. It offers much of the best of Twitter: with a well-curated set of follows (and a chronological, not algorithmic timeline), I get to hear directly from a lot of true experts commenting in real time on current events. But I see absolutely no reason to expect the platform to avoid the problems that Twitter encountered as it grew (and Mastodon fostered as it failed to grow). Its own “federated protocol”—literally the entire reason it was built, and the main/only technical pitch in its early days—is totally irrelevant. And the platform’s main “we’re not like Twitter” features, the “nuclear block” that deletes all (direct) interactions retroactively and its support for blocklists, have led to a “block first, block often” culture that certainly reduces discomfort but also enshrines it as the most echo-chambery of the platforms, even compared with Mastodon. I’d argue that Bluesky has avoided the rancor of late-days Twitter moderation mainly because it hasn’t reached anything like the size and diversity of Twitter, and consequently doesn’t have the cultural, political, and economic significance for people to work all that hard at ruining it. We’ll see.
I’d argue that Bluesky has avoided the rancor of late-days Twitter moderation mainly because it hasn’t reached anything like the size and diversity of Twitter, and consequently doesn’t have the cultural, political, and economic significance for people to work all that hard at ruining it.
This makes perfect sense. This is a really good description of why Twitter began to suck. And it has sucked for quiet a while. Long before Elon took it over. The early days of Twitter were great. I really enjoyed it and it didn't have anywhere near the features that are taken for granted today. It was because it was more narrow.
I was early on Mastodon as well but never used the "private" messaging stuff. I just didn't trust it. I think Mastodon was a good idea but has fallen into the trap of not meeting people's expectations. It seems like the early adopters were more in line with the original idea of federation but the adopters from the last few years are more interested in a Twitter alternative with more censorship.
Nostr obsoleted Mastodon for me really quickly.
reply
People will tell you that Jack was woke and that is why Twitter sucks. Other people will tell you Elon is a Nazi and that is why Twitter sucks. They are both wrong. You can't put the whole world in a room and expect people to not get very angry. There is far to much pressure to censor if you have the power to do it. Depending on the company structure and the leadership's backbone you will eventually buckle under the pressure.
May be an unpopular opinion but I have come to believe not everything scales and silos or communities have value. Rules are important. That's what is great about freedom. I can choose who to and not to associate with. Nostr is much closer to this than anything else.
reply
The reason Nostr is closer is because the npub is at the center and each person holds that. Not a central entity. Sure, relays can and do censor. Most of us want censors to block spam (Spam can be very grey btw). But the fact that it is not hard to run a relay and this is a protocol, not an app means that decentralization is much easier to do.
No guarantees that Nostr will succeed. I think its kinda up to us. If people don't value these things then it will die. I'm not convince people get it at a large enough scale yet. If that is true, we will have the history of Nostr to show that it can be done if the masses wake up in the future.
reply
May be an unpopular opinion but I have come to believe not everything scales and silos or communities have value.
This. Communities have massive value and the good ones are diverse enough to not be an echo chamber. But not fully inclusive. Can't cater to everyone in discussions because we're all emotional beings in the end (except the gpt copy pasta people but eff these guys)
Nostr is much closer to this than anything else.
Because its a protocol. Its very young though. May need a v2 at some point in the near future to get rid of inherent inefficiencies.
No guarantees that Nostr will succeed. I think its kinda up to us.
It is. I wish I had time to build proper federation. I think this has been the best constructive criticism (to my knowledge @petertodd was among the first to mention it) that I've seen. Censorship resistance needs a means to talk relay-to-relay and not miss anything.
I don't really think it needs a NIP to truly implement it (though a well designed protocol could help if at some point optimization is needed to reduce load on relays.)
reply
133 sats \ 1 reply \ @sambuca 21h
It does need a v2, but I think it's either very close to (or already past) the point where a v2 can be implemented without both killing the V1 and dooming the V2 to failure. If there is still time I also don't know how a v2 (several breaking changes) gets done, besides someone influential simply forking it and successfully marketing their fork.
reply
50 sats \ 0 replies \ @optimism 18h
Protocol handshakes to establish versions is the easiest way and has been used for ages; every https connection you start to read this message performs a handshake.
Software implementations may be strict or non-strict about versions supported. It's not hard; just needs someone with experience to champion it.
100 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford 18 Apr
Yep, relays to relay talk would be a massive improvement and it seems like something that could be done outside of the NIPs.
reply
I've seen some proxy implementations but that just sits at the front-end (at least that's what it did when I looked at it). The real power would IMHO be in having a community federated relay - think for example an SN relay that only tracks SN users' known npubs and the surrounding events, and stores these. Can serve back via a read only relay.
SN provides NIP-05 services too so we know which relays to look at for the content of each npub...