Fediverse

Federated platforms don't die to corporate-type enshittification. They die to spam or elitism.

If operators fail to collaborate on keeping spam down, the platform becomes unusable or greatly-diminished due to spam. See Usenet for example — yes, it's still around, but it's greatly diminished from the 1990s. New projects and organizations don't tell participants to subscribe to a Usenet newsgroup for discussion. (Curiously, email mailing-lists have outlived Usenet in this way, at least for technical projects. While email is federated, any given mailing-list is centralized.)

If the technology isn't developed with an eye to new users' needs and new use cases, because it's "good enough" for the existing established users, the platform becomes dated and gets replaced by something trendy and corporate. This is IRC vs. Discord and Slack. IRC has a higher barrier to entry and infamously doesn't work well on mobile — but it's good enough for the old farts who care about it, while the young farts move to Discord instead.

No, it's not possible. The openness of the platform means even if one instance decides to paywall, everyone else keeps working just fine.

That's pretty much why I made my own instance: nobody can take it away from me. I can ban whichever instance I deem hostile or don't want content from. Nobody's taking away my API anymore or shoving ads in my face.

Nobody can pull a Reddit or Twitter on the fediverse, there will always be alternative instances to use putting pressure on the big ones to not drive away people.

It won't enshittify in the strict Doctorow sense. But it will become shittier as more people who are currently plaguing Reddit, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and making those platforms terrible discover the Fediverse and come splatter their cowpats here. That's almost inevitable: it's happened to just about anything that ever became popular.

Incidentally, that's also a big part of the reason why it's supremely important to boycott Threads and not let it federate: the Fediverse needs to grow, but it doesn't need to grow with an influx of low-quality Facebook users.

I think that word is used wrongly here. Enshittification is a specific process and not just a product getting worse.

Who would enshitiffy it, and how?

Bluesky are an example of hard to implement federation, so easy to enshitiffy, but Mastodon and Sharkey are still around

I've only been on this platform for a little less than a year, but my guess is it will be brought down by petty infighting, not financial incentives. World and a few other instances have already decided to defederate from hexbear, and there's enough tension between World and ml that defederation seems like a real possibility. While the goal may be a decentralized platform, the largest communities are on these two instances, and it they break apart their might not be enough content to keep new users' interest.

Even if Lemmy gets past the infighting between the liberal Reddit refugees of World and the, "old Lemmy,"" communists of ml, users seem to tie their identity very heavily towards their instance. I'm worried that in the long term, that will drive people away from committing to cross-instance communities; even now, I hear people brag about how they've blocked entire instances because they're full of, "centrists," or, "tankies." I think the downside of federation is that it leads to tribalism, and enough of it could kill the momentum Lemmy needs to grow.

I don't mean to sound down on Lemmy; it's the most interesting platform I've seen in years, and I'm curious to see how it develops. But at this point, I've abandoned Reddit, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, and MySpace; I've learned that social media accounts are not permanent parts of your life. I'm having a lot of fun with Lemmy, but I don't expect to be using it in 5 years.

Enshittification isn't always driven by a conscious person or organization with an agenda, much less one with an agenda of short term financial gain. Sometimes the aggregation of a bunch of individual decisions causes something to get shittier. Or better. Or just different. 4chan is not at all like it was 20 years ago, but it wasn't because of corporate influence. The culture just changes.

So if the question is whether the fediverse might someday suck, I think the answer is probably yes. It remains to be seen how it will suck, who will have caused it to be that way, and whether there will be other nice things about it.

I'd say that it's possible but extremely unlikely. Acc. to Doctorow enshittification requires three things:

1. "Consolidation" - i.e. the corporation gets too big and powerful
2. "Unrestricted twiddling for them" - i.e. using power to prevent being legislated on.
3. "Total ban on twiddling for us" - i.e. enforcing the legislation to prevent competition.

The Fediverse is designed in a way that it's more resistant to #2, as inter-operability decreases the cost of switch for users - if you see an entity (person, corporation, group, whatever) twiddling too much it's relatively painless to pack your things and leave.

However, I believe that if an instance consolidated so much power in #1 that it's enable to enforce an "it's me or them" on the users, even the Fediverse could be enshittified. And by "so much power" I don't mean something like Lemmy World, I mean a couple orders of magnitude bigger than the rest.

Not until they are eclipsed by proprietary ActivityPub apps. Threads and Flipboard already exist.

However, there is no AP but proprietary rival to e.g. Lemmy/Mbin/PieFed (edit: there will be?) or PeerTube.

Potentially, but in different ways. You could argue that mass defederation and hostility between communities are the beginning of a fediverse specific enshittification process. And instead of running out of money and then swamping platforms with ads, the big servers could run out of money or get a bored admin and instances could dissapear. Constantly dissapearing instances could also be a fediverse specific enshittification process.

The fediverse's decentralization is meant to circumvent this possibility. It's all too easy to ignore one or two bad instances if it comes to that. No matter how big they get. It's part of the reason you don't see the lemmy.world instance in the lemmy server browser. It forces people to spread across the instances more instead of lemmy.world taking the direction of the fediverse wherever they see fit due to how many users they have. As long as the admins continue to respect this viewpoint, enshittifcation of the Fediverse will be postponed.

Probably not the same kind of « enshitification », but I think the fediverse creates small communities, and sometimes, it’s difficult / impossible to find non-aggressive communities for some subjects.

It’s not really solving the issues caused by the users themselves, especially when communities are not big enough to justify big moderation teams, and those people have no incentive at all to be « kind » (it’s hit or miss I would say). Instead of 1 big community with good moderation, you can end up with many small communities with little or bad moderation.

I have no solution to propose, it’s probably inherent to the fediverse.

The mods and admins are the real risk. Not saying that they are, but they can very likely become the ones who ruin lemmy