Something I noticed a lot is that while the whole promise if the fediverse is decentralization, it’s not sustainable and very centralized at most.
In the last months I opened multiple accounts to use multiple fediverse services(Mastodon, Pleroma, Lemmy,… etc) and I chooses non-mainstream servers to test the decentralization of the fediverse.
Most of the servers that I opened account in to use got shutdown by the servers owners due to a lot of reasons( literally every server that got shutdown has it’s own specific reason, from financials to ideology and software).
From what I can see currently at least, the best approach to social media sites are either complete P2P(which comes with it’s own disadvantages, but it has a strong advantages to consider) or one centralized server.
Reminds me of the old BBS and Usenet days. Pros and cons to it, like anything else. I agree that it’s sustainable. Biggest issue right now is the lack of users and content in niche communities. But that problem is fixable.
If we hang in and keep talking, more folks can find us. We don’t need hundreds of millions to have something worthwhile here. I read and enjoy lemmy every day.
I disagree with you respectfully.
The day the fediverse begins to gain a significant amount of users( speaking in terms of tens of millions) is the day where every pitfall of the fediverse is going to make the experience very miserable(bad reliability, bad security and terrible privacy)
The reason why the fediverse is surviving right now is that it’s relatively very small (under 20 million accounts, with most users not being active at all in the fediverse) compared to the alternatives.
I get your point. More numbers brings more problems. But I think it also brings more solutions and more helpful hands, too. Growing pains, if you will.
Removed by mod