It has an owner who can do with it whatever he wants. When you participate in that, you give value to another’s property. Matodon, lemmy and the rest of the fediverse are collective, they do not have a single owner, giving value to the platform only gives value to its users.
I don’t know about the rest, but for me that is an insurmountable problem.
You have all the official addresses, I recommend using the Tor network
I’m not going to discuss it with you, because I’m not a doctor nor is it the issue, but the health authorities (at least the European ones) do not agree with your statement.
Personally I think that financing a platform like this with premium subscriptions is illusory. I could be wrong but what are they going to offer as a premium?
I think it may be interesting to note that Spotify is closing its first green year in its history this year, for reference.
Ok. You are in a situation of harassment and you believe that giving your data and delegating your security to a private company that responds to economic interests is a viable long-term solution.
There are things that one cannot argue against
I will count it as a victory when my government’s communication channels with me are not private property. A government-owned Mastodon server for official accounts would be logical (the EU already has it even though it barely uses it)
Well, I am not a systems engineer to answer your question, in any case smaller Hitlers equals Hitlers with less power. Dividing power is not the definitive solution to authoritarianism, but it usually helps a lot, especially if the agents are also competitive. “If you are too Hitler, I’ll go to this other server that is a little less so” is a valid incentive to avoid the Hitlerization of the admins.
I don’t think I’ve ever used the name Hitler so much.
Ok, I haven’t denied that, the tools are different (I don’t even know Twitter’s tools very well), I debate whether that is worth enough to accept that it is centralized. If over time they consider that something else is more profitable, they will change the moderation tools, have no doubt.
Ok, if for you the API is the most important thing, go ahead, I’m worried about more companies doing “things” with my data, everyone has their priorities.
P.S. Unlike in BlueSky in Mastodon you can be 100% sure that the API will never be closed, in Bluesky it will depend on variable business interests
Ok, you weren’t able to find interesting things on mastodon, it’s not mastodon’s fault if you followed doctors who post complete articles, but in any case you’d rather sell your data than make the effort. Good for you that you have found your place
Ok, if it’s good for you I’m glad, maybe over time it will happen to you like vaping and you can completely switch to decentralized networks
That is, you’d rather have an algorithm tell you what’s fun or interesting than the ability to discover things organically. Ok, bluesky is your place
Are these details really that important? Is it really that difficult to manually block 50-100 users? I don’t know, everything you are telling me are, at best, marginal improvements that do not justify selling all your personal data to a private company seeking profit from those data/contributions.
It has a single owner who makes the decisions and makes profitable the contributions of the users. It is a social media model that has been over for me for some time now, if they are open the better for them, I am not going to join anyway.
My experience is not that, maybe I follow less “boring” people and the chronological order seems great to me. I have also not seen repeated toots from the same person and of course, people like this Dr. Cory do not seem like the right person to follow (from what you say, I have no idea who he is)
The market niche today is what it is, that is clear and gives the direction of the company, but its main interest is to make money (something legitimate of course) so if the market situation changes and Twitter or Truth Social go to the bottom they could try to capture that garbage out of pure economic interest.
In Mastodon something like this could happen in a specific node, by blocking it you avoid losing the entire network. It is an absolute advantage. Mastodon’s only problem with Bluesky is Bluesky’s marketing department
I don’t know, it depends on the type of content you are used to seeing and these things, in my language and my interests, Mastodon is enough for me with about 150-200 daily toots from the media and people I follow, not all of them interesting, mind you, but most
I left Twitter years ago, but I think you could also block whoever you want, whether people do it more or less is independent of the site, the moderation tools are the same. 3
What’s more, I am 100% sure that if in a few years Bluesky considers it economically beneficial for its shareholders that these tools “have occasional failures” this will happen without a doubt. This is something that if happens in Mastodon, changing the node you are done
Yesterday I read on mastodon that leaving Twitter to go to Bluesky is like quitting smoking to start vaping. Changing a centralized place that lives off your data for another one. Right now Bluesky does not have hate speech like Twitter just because it does not suit the current accounts of its shareholders
No, he is not the owner of Mastodon. No, his company is not responsible for what happens there, because there is no company or similar. A non-profit foundation (chaired by Eugen Rochko) develops the software and launches it on mastodon.social, and that foundation does not even participate in what the rest of the instances do. They could go crazy tomorrow, sell the domain or change the software to make it more invasive, the rest of the instances would be sent to hell and the network would continue as if nothing had happened