I'm talking about those who host their blogs statically on Github Pages and elsewhere, the small peasants of the Interwebs who collectively make up the biggest portion of it and make its wheels churn with their content and toil.

All that negativity I'm seeing towards Disqus is baseless. They criticize it for showing ads and being less privacy friendly but then which technology today isn't? Name me one company from Big Tech or Silicon Valley which actually respects their user's privacy in practice, not just words. You'll be left scratching your heads for a long time but no name will come out.

And I also keep hearing about these "self hosted" alternatives like Commento but none of them have gained any traction. Building and implementing a commenting system isn't easy even though CMS like Wordpress try their best. Unless you implement social OAuth logins like Github or Google, not many folks will like to interact on your site by singing up for a whole new site account, especially true if you're a small blogger who has just started. And managing all the data communication between the frontend and backend isn't easy.

With Disqus, we get this whole setup and workflow readymade with nice looking dashboard and all, and that too for gratis, not a dime to pay! Then why shouldn't a blogger use it, I'm yet to hear any justifiable answer to this question.

For some reason, I had always hoped against hope that at least the old domain name will always be retained by Elon's X team, at least as a reminder of their revolutionary beginnings in the form of "setting the bird free" or "liberating the free speech" as it was often called. But today, even that last vestige called twitter, that domain name on the back of which some of us used to mentally stay in the nostalgia, has also been broken - twitter.com is no more :-(

As of now, the domain redirects to x.com, the new one.

However, in our hearts and minds, it will always be "twitter" and we shall call it "twitter"! And there is one more place where the name twitter shall always find a place - the twitter bootstrap open source project which will keep telling the story of where it all began!

The nature of social networks is very dynamic in nature. About two decades ago, who would have thought that the leading "text rich" social network sites like Tildes, Mastodon, etc. would be so popular today? Especially when Reddit had just taken some some baby steps and was mostly considered the hipster's town square sometime in late 2000s. What do you think will happen by the next decade?

By "text rich" I mean networks where textual content is of the primary focus, other media formats like images and videos are usually secondary. Even with Reddit's flashy new interface and all, their main focus is still on text content which is good. I think one great thing about this kind of content is that it is refreshingly creative and original, and gives you an opportunity to have intellectually fulfilling discussions - which is quite rare on other kinds of networks.

Summarily, below is a brief list of such networks which are doing a fabulous job in letting us exchange ideas and share useful information:

• Tildes.net
• Old Reddit
• lobste.rs
• news.ycombinator.com
• slashdot.org
• mastodon.social
• Discuit
• hubski.com
• metafilter.com

Feel free to suggest more, we need more of them!

I'm taking some time to set up a mastodon account, and am currently confused about how following other federated accounts is supposed to work.

Let's use https://lemmy.world/c/comicstrips as an example. I go to that link and I see posts from other federated sites, as well as posts made directly on lemmy.world (I presume). I can also view all posts from that community in r.nf as well (https://r.nf/c/comicstrips@lemmy.world). I see all the same posts from the lemmy link.

What I don't understand is why, when I follow @comicstrips@lemmy.world on mastodon I only ever am shown replies and boosts from the account. I don't see the original image post, which I was expecting.

What am I missing? For what it's worth I'm using Phanpy to interact with mastodon, but am experiencing the same behavior on mastodon.social as well.

This is a question I eventually ask about every social media site I use(d). I like Tildes, and the discussions here are much more constructive than any other place I've seen, however I've seen it to be true even here. When one doesn't curate their feed, and use the default home page, the negative topics seems to dominate. I'm talking about the topics that talk about problems and what's wrong with something, often with titles implying the awfulness or emergency of such a problem. I think I don't need to elaborate on how this is much more prevalent and extreme on other sites. But nevertheless, it's a recurring pattern even here.

I know the argument that goes that humans are problem-fixing machines, and that there are psychological incentives to focus on problems. However, this seems overly reductive and lacking in explanatory power to me. Outside of internet, this is not a phenomenon I've experienced with people, unless they were mentally going through something very rough. Otherwise, people generally seem to talk about neutral or positive issues. And even while talking about negative issues, the tone often isn't grim, and doesn't leave a depressive aftertaste.

Even on the internet, in smaller spaces and more closed spaces, like chatting servers, this doesn't seem to hold true. Sure, there are politically-oriented, and therefore problem-oriented spaces even there, but most spaces don't seem to be that way. Back when I used Facebook too, while the posts were vain, most of my friends and acquaintances were just interested in sharing and commenting on social lives.

So I think this is a problem that is more endemic to "open" social media sites, with easily accessible and open-to-public spaces, rather than applying to the whole humanity or even every internet space. Its one of my biggest head scratchers about social media sites. So far I couldn't find a satisfactory explanation in the literature either. Doesn't mean there isn't, but I haven't stumbled upon such.

So, I'm interested in your opinions: Why do negative topics dominate on open social media sites, even here, unless curated against? Why is this such a strong recurring pattern for sites structured like this, while it's not in other online and physical spaces and interections I mentioned?

I've long been uncomfortable using platforms that have a bad reputation with respect to:

1. Human rights / genocide
2. Disinformation
3. Privacy

All three of those can be connected with advertising revenue, among other things. When I use platforms that are shady in this regard, I know I'm colluding with them and contributing to the problems they create. So it's been a relief to see new platforms like Tildes emerge, as well as those based on ActivityPub.

But even platforms that don't have overt advertising (Telegram?) do have a problem with hate groups that go unchallenged. And I know that if I was running an instance of an ActivityPub compatible platform such as KBin, I mightn't be able to keep on top of moderating things like disinformation.

So I suppose my question is, where do you draw the line? I've deleted my Twitter and Meta accounts and I'm exploring alternatives, but I'm not sure if I'm going from the darkness to the light, or just into shades of grey.