Tomat0

Devs stated it's not a priority but if someone else were to do the work and make a PR, they would not be opposed to including it.

Not invite-only, but invite as an option to bypass the usual manual approval process. Captchas from my experience aren't effective, as PeerTube hCaptchas have been bypassed.

Yeah, this video is meant to answer the absence of the feature on the desktop site and the official client, explaining the history and the fact that the feature is on the way.

Yeah, this video is meant to answer the absence of the feature on the desktop site and the official client, explaining the history and the fact that the feature is on the way.

Yeah, on a third-party app. This is meant to address the question many users may have of why they don't see the option on the website or the official app itself and explain the history.

I think this mentality is far too narrow and can lead to problems down the road. And it's a dangerously common one among leftists. The bigger threat right now isn't some sort of shadowy cabal of elites, it's market-based logic, which can manifest through the little guy just as much as the big guy.

For example, I'm already seeing discussions of "ethical advertising" or "paying influencers" but this only raises more questions. How will we keep funding this model? What happens when we're outcompeted by other sites like Twitter for ad revenue? After all why wouldn't an advertiser pick the method which is more effective. Natural selection and administrative costs will slowly chip away at what distinguishes us.

The foundations you lay now play a role in determining your future. By refusing any form of commercialization, it forces us to innovate to cut costs. This could be cutting technological overhead as with PeerTube's WebTorrent, it could be setting a foundation for promoting/getting content on the Fediverse which isn't dependent on constantly having to pay people to switch over.

The blockchain-based and "free speech"platforms do exactly this and it's why they all die so quickly. They may be little guys but they lack the patience/imagination to approach the issue in an organic fashion, end up trying to ape the big players, and never build a foundation strong enough to last. The market doesn't think in moralistic terms, it doesn't care how big or little you are, the only way out isn't to compete on revenue-based grounds.

This is why I think it's important that in these early discussions we continue to oppose all forms of monetization/strategies reliant on large and continuous spending. It sets up a vicious cycle that's impossible to escape.

This isn't something I think I can sum up easily in a Lemmy comment. @armoredgore@lemmy.ml, I can give you ideas and help you out either on Discord or Matrix

I think this is a good time to remind people: these sort of opportunities will often present themselves due to a combination of factors well beyond any fediverse user's control. Trying to force them to occur is like trying to build a house out of unpacked sand, it'll quickly fall apart.

What advocates need to do is to focus on building a solid foundation within the Fediverse so that these opportunities can be capitalized on more effectively each time. We don't want it where people join then leave when the hype dies down, when they see a lack of content, or get annoyed with platform quirks. Unfortunately, it seems a lot of discourse tries to focus on marketing-first and assumes the rest will sort itself out. It's the opposite actually.

Relating to the topic at hand though, I agree with Eugen. Direct people to other instances. Do not let mastodon.social's downtime dissuade people. If anything, this might be a good opportunity to spread traffic across instances.

Some of the ones I've found with actual content on them have been TILvids and watch.breadTube.TV.

Completely agree. I went into more detail elsewhere in this thread but I think the whole question of democratization is just going to lead to feature creep and is better suited for a separate Fediverse project if done at all.

IMO people are overreacting to the effects of the interview; if there's any lesson, I think its that putting your all your eggs into the Reddit basket for something like antiwork rather than IRL was a poor idea fundamentally.

IMO any such changes towards democratization would probably be best suited to a different Fediverse project entirely given how much it alters the structure of the genre of site Lemmy falls under.

I think the real lesson from the whole fiasco is that people shouldn't place more political expectations on a subreddit than its capable of handling. Reddit/Lemmy has specific uses it's good for, and things it's not good at. Upvotes, subcommunities, and central moderation all contribute to the problems with Reddit but at the same time they stay because they've proven to be the most effective at doing what Reddit is built to do. Yet the unfortunate thing is that a lot of movements have begun using Reddit in ways it wasn't meant to be used.

When it comes to making a sort of rallying point for things like what /r/antiwork was going after, IMO the whole structure of the site would have to be re-thought. And while I think we should begin with experimenting with platform design more, I don't think it's a good idea to burden platforms which were designed to act as direct alternatives to mainstream platforms with unnecessary features which may or may not work out.

So IMO, it's better to work on theorycrafting an entirely separate ActivityPub project which isn't constrained by Reddit-like design and can directly address the issues /r/antiwork was inherently facing from even before this interview.

Fantastic idea! I actually never thought about this, this could probably be done fediverse-wide.