Submitted 1 year ago by tchambers@indieweb.social to fediversenews@venera.social
This seems very important and worth ongoing study:
“Once again, results suggest a rise in diversity as the 10 biggest server contribution to the Fediverse is reduced by more than 10%. So, even if the biggest servers are accumulating more users, it seems that the Fediverse is becoming more decentralized.”
@tchambers @fediversereport @spreadmastodon @fediversenews
Increased decentralization is great news; however, unless we all agree together to #FediblockMeta , the fediverse is about to become massively centralized, and mostly the private property of Mark Zuckerberg
@tchambers @fediversereport @spreadmastodon @fediversenews Interesting! Although there are some quirks in the data, with joindiaspora and diasp.org (neither of which are Mastodon) in last March's accounts and not the current list, and with mastodon.cloud and gc2.jp going from over 10% of MAU to not appearing at all in the latest statistics.
@jdp23@indieweb.social @tchambers@indieweb.social @fediversereport@mastodon.social @spreadmastodon@mastodon.social @fediversenews@venera.social
Also, it'd be nice to know something about what comprises all the "others", how many accounts do those instances have, how many of them are there?
Otherwise, it'll be interesting to track this going forward because mastodon.social right now is growing faster than it did between March and 17 May ... the picture could very well look different when comparing May to August.
I'd say: it's a start...and I could see from an analysis standpoint how the researcher started with what was doable directly via the #mastodon API. But hopefully to add others as they can.
Adding the author into this thread: @marcelcosta
And by definition, I'd think the decentralized story is likely only *better* when you assume the other non-Mastodon Fediverse data... the-federation.info now counts Calckey as 3,500 users, I think FediDB counts them as 8.700 users.
@jupiter_rowland No, I didn't expect it to only to be about Mastodon -- in fact the article was very clear that "the active account data refers only to Mastodon servers, as other software don’t necessarily give this information". I was just highlighting that two large instances that disappeared from the stats and neither of them are Mastodon, so that implies something janky going on with the stats.
@tchambers
@jdp23@indieweb.social @tchambers@indieweb.social @fediversereport@mastodon.social @spreadmastodon@mastodon.social @fediversenews@venera.social
Yea ... just squinting at the graphs, I think these errors in the graphs mask the growth of mastodon.social. I would bet that when corrected, mastodon.social will have grown in it's share from March to May.
sj_zero 1 year ago
Love to see it!
A diverse and decentralized fediverse is a healthy fediverse.