d3rr set up a Lemmy in Docker instance on one of my VPSs, and Weegs and I got a Lemmy set up on my Cassandra server - but neither got online.
Why?
To counter the woke Lemmy federation we were going to cultivate the Lemmy Deplorables and maybe a Fringe Deplorables Web Ring. @LarrySwinger was keen on this too.
Lemmy is not one website, but a network of interconnected websites ("instances") (in the sense you can subscribe to a community from one instance while being registered on another instance) - so the answer is it depends on how the specific instance is managed. The biggest ones (lemmy.ml, lemmy.world) are probably where "radlibs" are.
Yeah I figured the bigger instances would have more of them on there. I've asked chatgpt for some instances where theres less of them and it gave me a few. I just hate performative progressivism.
Almost all instances have the same population. It's what I call faux-distributed. It has the technical advantages of distribution but a same-ism all around of centralization. Some would argue that because instances can block subs or users from another it's not technically true but it is practically true. And because the only instances that would do that kind of blocking to differentiate themselves would have censorship culture it would be a distinct group you wouldn't want anyway.
My critique of it fits into my argument that "distributed" websites make the world less distributed, because we already have a distributed model where everyone can run a unique website. It's collectivizing more people into a single space and calling it distributed just because the tech under it all is a bit. Real distribution offers you more unique spaces in total.
Long story short, the instance you pick doesn't matter. 90% of instances are in the same space. 80% of the remaining are censorship maxxers. The remainder are free speech instances that are blocked from interacting with the rest of the space so they aren't really lemmy. They are just reddit alternatives running lemmy for their software. Each instance is better to think of as being an account provider similar to email. When you pick gmail as your provider you aren't asking if gmail has a better emailing community. The space is email.
You can simulate a centralized system with a distributed one, and you can simulate a distributed system with a centralized one. Humanity does both of these things a lot, often in layers. Many networks in the world? Make software that makes it act like a single network. One or two protocols it uses? Simulate protocols over TCP to make this network act like many different kinds of networks. Too many protocols to choose from? Collapse all internet activity onto just HTTP. HTTP too narrow? Let's use javascript to write all kind of schemes for ways things can communicate on it. Too many websites? Let's converge on Facebook or Reddit. It's all the same thing? Let's make Facebook groups and sub-reddits.
Lemmy is a simulation of a centralized system (like Reddit) on top of a distributed medium. Is there some hidden benefit to this if as a simulate it behaves exactly like Reddit?
Humanity and maybe all of technology is build on flip flopping whether we want a centralized system or a distributed one. The question is which one is better for humanity.. making something different on a centralized system or making a whole lot of distributed things come together to act centralized? Lemmy even works lockstep to decide which instances are blocked from main interaction. Might as well have a reddit admin staff and run it as a central service.
Goat Matrix is sort of the opposite. I made a distinct space associated with a name provided to me by a centralized naming authority. So it's a part of fan out instead of fan in.
My critique of it fits into my argument that "distributed" websites make the world less distributed, because we already have a distributed model where everyone can run a unique website. It's collectivizing more people into a single space and calling it distributed just because the tech under it all is a bit. Real distribution offers you more unique spaces in total.
I agree by and large which is why I was fine running a PhpBB instance: it isn't silo'd because people use the same program - a web browser - to visit the website. But one problem that arises is that every website burdens users with registering an account before they can participate. In my opinion there should be a federation or web ring of forums where one requirement is that they all allow guest posting. There weren't barriers to entry to posting to imageboards in the '00s, and there still aren't for the ones beside 4chan. It should be like that.
One advantage to AP is visibility. If you run a traditional community and you want it to gain traction, one thing you can do is promote individual posts on other websites. With federation it's like all posts are automatically promoted on other websites within the same protocol. This can help you gain users. Even if your instance is heavily censored (which it won't be from the very beginning, by the way), you will still gain from promotion among the few that don't censor you, compared to none. In my view the biggest problem with AP is that most of the software for it is shit but there are some gems like 0chan, mastodon, gab.
Long story short, the instance you pick doesn't matter. 90% of instances are in the same space. 80% of the remaining are censorship maxxers. The remainder are free speech instances that are blocked from interacting with the rest of the space so they aren't really lemmy. They are just reddit alternatives running lemmy for their software. Each instance is better to think of as being an account provider similar to email. When you pick gmail as your provider you aren't asking if gmail has a better emailing community. The space is email.
Now it is possible to turn this around by starting a social movement that opposes censorship. There should be a federation in multiple senses of the word between instances that oppose censorship, and by way of paradox only block the instances that do censor you. I.e. we embrace being silo'd. So if you have a bunch of instances like Hilarious Chaos and whatever else supports free speech, that can be a tight-knit community, and they can gain traction from people who are tired of cancel culture. Then that becomes the real Lemmy and we call the communist instances fake Lemmy.
Log in
d3rr set up a Lemmy in Docker instance on one of my VPSs, and Weegs and I got a Lemmy set up on my Cassandra server - but neither got online.
Why?
To counter the woke Lemmy federation we were going to cultivate the Lemmy Deplorables and maybe a Fringe Deplorables Web Ring. @LarrySwinger was keen on this too.
I miss d3rr and weegs now that you've mentioned them.
Lemmy is not one website, but a network of interconnected websites ("instances") (in the sense you can subscribe to a community from one instance while being registered on another instance) - so the answer is it depends on how the specific instance is managed. The biggest ones (lemmy.ml, lemmy.world) are probably where "radlibs" are.
Yeah I figured the bigger instances would have more of them on there. I've asked chatgpt for some instances where theres less of them and it gave me a few. I just hate performative progressivism.
Almost all instances have the same population. It's what I call faux-distributed. It has the technical advantages of distribution but a same-ism all around of centralization. Some would argue that because instances can block subs or users from another it's not technically true but it is practically true. And because the only instances that would do that kind of blocking to differentiate themselves would have censorship culture it would be a distinct group you wouldn't want anyway.
My critique of it fits into my argument that "distributed" websites make the world less distributed, because we already have a distributed model where everyone can run a unique website. It's collectivizing more people into a single space and calling it distributed just because the tech under it all is a bit. Real distribution offers you more unique spaces in total.
Long story short, the instance you pick doesn't matter. 90% of instances are in the same space. 80% of the remaining are censorship maxxers. The remainder are free speech instances that are blocked from interacting with the rest of the space so they aren't really lemmy. They are just reddit alternatives running lemmy for their software. Each instance is better to think of as being an account provider similar to email. When you pick gmail as your provider you aren't asking if gmail has a better emailing community. The space is email.
Meta-opinion beyond Lemmy:
You can simulate a centralized system with a distributed one, and you can simulate a distributed system with a centralized one. Humanity does both of these things a lot, often in layers. Many networks in the world? Make software that makes it act like a single network. One or two protocols it uses? Simulate protocols over TCP to make this network act like many different kinds of networks. Too many protocols to choose from? Collapse all internet activity onto just HTTP. HTTP too narrow? Let's use javascript to write all kind of schemes for ways things can communicate on it. Too many websites? Let's converge on Facebook or Reddit. It's all the same thing? Let's make Facebook groups and sub-reddits.
Lemmy is a simulation of a centralized system (like Reddit) on top of a distributed medium. Is there some hidden benefit to this if as a simulate it behaves exactly like Reddit?
Humanity and maybe all of technology is build on flip flopping whether we want a centralized system or a distributed one. The question is which one is better for humanity.. making something different on a centralized system or making a whole lot of distributed things come together to act centralized? Lemmy even works lockstep to decide which instances are blocked from main interaction. Might as well have a reddit admin staff and run it as a central service.
Goat Matrix is sort of the opposite. I made a distinct space associated with a name provided to me by a centralized naming authority. So it's a part of fan out instead of fan in.
Insightful.^2
Insightful!
I agree by and large which is why I was fine running a PhpBB instance: it isn't silo'd because people use the same program - a web browser - to visit the website. But one problem that arises is that every website burdens users with registering an account before they can participate. In my opinion there should be a federation or web ring of forums where one requirement is that they all allow guest posting. There weren't barriers to entry to posting to imageboards in the '00s, and there still aren't for the ones beside 4chan. It should be like that.
One advantage to AP is visibility. If you run a traditional community and you want it to gain traction, one thing you can do is promote individual posts on other websites. With federation it's like all posts are automatically promoted on other websites within the same protocol. This can help you gain users. Even if your instance is heavily censored (which it won't be from the very beginning, by the way), you will still gain from promotion among the few that don't censor you, compared to none. In my view the biggest problem with AP is that most of the software for it is shit but there are some gems like 0chan, mastodon, gab.
Now it is possible to turn this around by starting a social movement that opposes censorship. There should be a federation in multiple senses of the word between instances that oppose censorship, and by way of paradox only block the instances that do censor you. I.e. we embrace being silo'd. So if you have a bunch of instances like Hilarious Chaos and whatever else supports free speech, that can be a tight-knit community, and they can gain traction from people who are tired of cancel culture. Then that becomes the real Lemmy and we call the communist instances fake Lemmy.
https://hilariouschaos.com/ is one "free speech"-oriented instance I know, but it's probably not very active.
It's gay.
sad that kbin kinda dead
i just know about mbin