I’ve been asked on TV hits and interviews lately to explain why decentralized social media is better, especially re: Mastodon.

[movie2468@mastodon.social]

@taylorlorenz

To answer this, we should first understand why people don’t think it makes sense. Someone I know that dislikes big business, and uses X said: “I struggle to understand the basics of a decentralized social network, it seems oxymoronic except for extreme nerds”.

Take that as you will, but hopefully it is useful feedback.

[ghostonthehalfshell@masto.ai]

@taylorlorenz

The most concise way I describe the difference between commercial algorithm based platforms versus the fediverse.

In the former, you are presented with the illusion of a town square, it propagates content based on spectacle and “engagement”

In the latter, people are the algorithm as members of distinct communities, moderated by real people.

1/2

[ghostonthehalfshell@masto.ai]

@taylorlorenz

Centralized, commercial and algorithm based platforms are centralized command and control platforms.

The fediverse is a constellation of everything from individually hosted servers to the larger instances like mastodon dot social, and everything in between.

I would ask people to consider where do you think the greater liberty resides?

We have seen the kind of censorship that emerges on all of the large commercial platforms. It’s not possible in the fediverse.

2/2

[ghostonthehalfshell@masto.ai]

@Movie2468 @taylorlorenz

I would like to suggest then that they struggled to understand a market based economy or democracy

[ghostonthehalfshell@masto.ai]

RE: https://masto.ai/@GhostOnTheHalfShell/110697014050821679

@taylorlorenz

Sometimes an image is worth 1000 words

[robotdeathsquad@mastodon.social]

@taylorlorenz Monopolies are bad and there's no reason why "posts" need to be owned by a monopoly. Fediverse is good for the same reason why email is good.

[lawyersgunsnmoney@mstdn.social]

@taylorlorenz You control what you see in your feed and you control what you post. No propaganda, censorship, games, surveillance or trolls. How is that not better in every way?

[jackyan@mastodon.social]

@taylorlorenz Number one for me is, 'You are not making some rich **** even richer.' Secondly, you have better, more meaningful conversations.

[movie2468@mastodon.social]

@GhostOnTheHalfShell @taylorlorenz

I would agree. That’s why I left the snippet about big business and the use of X. Makes no sense.

[garretpolk@mastodon.gamedev.place]

@taylorlorenz No ads
No algorithms
Just people talking to each other

[jameslundblad@mstdn.social]

@taylorlorenz It's like the public radio of social networks, user supported social network.

[phil_tanner@mastodon.philtanner.com]

@taylorlorenz @jackyan this. And thirdly, you're speech isn't limited by the rich ****s.

You can say that JK Rowling is a massive TERF.

And you can block US politicians. Your eyeballs are not directly funding ICE publicity campaigns via advertising.

[jackyan@mastodon.social]

@Phil_Tanner @taylorlorenz Excellent points, Phil!

[classwario@mastodon.social]

@taylorlorenz How would you? When your bluesky is 1000% more active

[happytobe@mastodon.social]

@taylorlorenz You formulate your own algorithm using hash tags. Nothing is suggested to you. There are no ads. Thus, on your feed, you see only what you want to see and connect only with the people and businesses you want to be connected with. Yet, you can still scroll and snoop around the entire space if you want to.

[user47@vmst.io]

@taylorlorenz tell them it’s just like bluesky, but all of their marketing lies are actually true here

[lukisko@fe.disroot.org]

@taylorlorenz
I would say that we can observe big US tech media. If there is anything which points to problems in the US governments, the government forces them to remove it. The same also applies to the individual companies which enforces their own censorship - "if CEO is not happy with it it may get removed" (or if there may a an issue with removing it directly, the suggestion algorithm will never pick it)

[shammusomuffihan@mastodon.social]

@taylorlorenz

My decision to switch was based on the motivations of the people running it. Commercial social media is motivated by commercial priorities. The point of the fediverse is connection for connection's sake.

[daedalouseros@hollow.raccoon.quest]

@taylorlorenz@mastodon.social the Fediverse is social media as it should have always been:

By the people, for the people, not by the corporation for the shareholders.

I might also say raw, personal interactions. On Fedi you interact with people, not algorithms designed to keep you doom scrolling.

[anatolegc@piaille.fr]

@Mastodon @taylorlorenz would you have some posters to promote Mastodon in my city?