It’s not in the fediverse

Not good. I can understand individual users or communities not wanting to be a part of the Fediverse or certain parts of it, but federation is a necessary condition for me to adopt a social media platform at this point.

For example, I’ve seen a few users discussing Kbin vs Lemmy. Now I prefer Lemmy, but I also want to see Kbin succeed. Despite that I think Lemmy is technically better, the fact that they use the same protocol means that we can talk to each other. We can agree to disagree in this new system.

We have seen what will happen if we allow social media to be owned by one company. Time and time again, the platform kills itself and those communities fragment. Sure Wikipedia is a company with a great deal of public trust, but so was Reddit. The issue is that the success of the system hinges on the benevolence of a single company or person. This is the main issue with centralized control in any instances: compromising the central controller kills the whole system.

If it gets popular, it’s an indication that users have not learned that lesson, and eventually that platform will too “enshittify” itself into oblivion. Hopefully, they’ll change course and federate.

Yeah that stuff is a bit obnoxious, but once you get browsing it doesn’t come up, at least for me. Well worth it for no YouTube ads and making tracking more difficult.

These two are now the first apps I install on any new device:

• Kiss launcher (simple and fast)
• Articons icon pack

Basically, my approach is to (mostly) prioritize text over icons, and reduce the colors I need to process.

Other apps:

• Brave browser (for YouTube and built-in anti-tracking features.)
• Librera (ebook/PDF reader with lots of features)
• Odyssey (local music player optimized for speed. My library is so large that all the other players were having trouble finding songs.)
• Graph 89 (TI graphing calculator emulator)
• Feeder (RSS feed aggregator)

Other historical artefacts like pottery, vellum writing, or stone tablets

I mean I could just smash or burn those things, and lots of important physical artifacts were smashed and burned over the years. I don’t think that easy destructability is unique to data. As far as archaeology is concerned (and I’m no expert on the matter!), the fact that the artefacts are fragile is not an unprecedented challenge. What’s scary IMO is the public perception that data, especially data on the cloud, is somehow immune from eventual destruction. This is the impulse that guides people (myself included) to be sloppy with archiving our data, specifically by placing trust in the corporations that administer cloud services to keep our data as if our of the kindness of their hearts.

Could it? Yeah, sure it could, and in some cases it will, but only if someone up the chain thinks it’s profitable. Profit motive should never dictate how archaeology is practiced.