Comment

Comment on Is Pixelfed sawing off the branch that the Fediverse is sitting on?

What’s thr point of making pixelfed just another mastodon type app.

The problem is the Fediverse could be a lot more than just “decentralized versions of existing apps”. Most people now have this app-centric mentality because it was beneficial for Big Tech sharecropping, not because it was better for us.

We shouldn’t need different types of apps to see different types of feeds and to sort our data in ways that we want.

source

Sort:hotnew top

mrdown@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
We don’t need all fediverse platforms to be a Mastodon clone, we can instead have certain fediverse clients that have a global feed for displaying from all the fediverse and specific feeds for each type of content (videos, texts, images).

source
- rglullis@communick.news ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  
  We don’t need all fediverse platforms to be a Mastodon clone
  
  We don’t need platforms.
  
  source
  - mrdown@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    
    A technology platform is the foundation for building and running business applications. The platform allows users to run their applications smoothly without worrying about the technology that supports them. At the same time, it allows technical staff to rapidly extend, enhance, or upgrade application software, increasing the speed of business.
    
    www.sap.com/…/what-is-a-technology-platform.html
    
    Pixelfed is definitely a platform . You only heard the term in context of centralized big social media so you think the term has bad connotation
    
    source
    rglullis@communick.news ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    
    You only heard the term in context of centralized big social media so you think the term has bad connotation
    
    Please, don’t assume things about the people on the other side of a debate. It’s condescending and it robs us all of learning.
    
    I’m not saying that we don’t need platforms because of “bad connotation”. I’m saying it because I have worked on a “social browser” for the fediverse, an application server for using activitypub as a transport mechanism and I know that we can develop an open social web that does not rely on server-centric applications.
    
    source
Steve@communick.news ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
I think you might be conflating two things. Right now the Fediverse largely looks like you just described. It’s in it’s infancy, trying to copy what it sees around it. Eventually it’ll become a rebellious teen and forge it’s on seperate identity. That’s inevitable. I wouldn’t worry about it.

It’s a very different thing though, saying all the apps need to integrate all the features and experience of every other app, so they’re all largely the same and there’s never a need to use more than one. That sounds like a terrible idea.

source
- rglullis@communick.news ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  No, far from me saying that the clients (apps?) need to look the same. What I am saying is that the differentiation should be happening at the client, not the server.
  
  It’s the thing with Communick. I wish I didn’t have to offer separate instances for each of the services (Mastodon, Lemmy, Funkwhale) but that every member could get one account which then could use as their main fediverse actor, regardless of “frontend” suited them best. The shell should adapt to the user, instead of the user being forced to adapt to the application.
  
  source
  - Steve@communick.news ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    So like a single ActivityPub instance that hosts all the data, but users can have a Pixelfed app, Lemmy app, etc. all connect to that one server and use it to give the experience they specifically provide.
    
    That’s a cool idea. I can see how that would work.
    
    source
    rglullis@communick.news ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    Yeah, the frustrating thing is that activitypods.org already does the hard part, but we need more developers interested in creating these clients that can work well with it.
    
    source