“وَٱقْصِدْ فِى مَشْيِكَ وَٱغْضُضْ مِن صَوْتِكَ ۚ إِنَّ أَنكَرَ ٱلْأَصْوَٰتِ لَصَوْتُ ٱلْحَمِيرِ”

“Be moderate in your pace. And lower your voice, for the ugliest of all voices is certainly the braying of donkeys.”

aspe:keyoxide.org:LWJJT46QY6F7W5MOKRUD3W6IOY

  • 1 Post
  • 48 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: July 16th, 2024

help-circle















  • Good read, thanks for sharing. But i think both of us are over estimating the tech literacy of the average user. Many of them look at software, or ideas, or platforms at surface level, and don’t care much about how software works internally.

    The average user isn’t going to care about federation, and might not even understand it. To us and the OP of the reddit thread, we’re familiar with federation, and have gotten used to it. It seems easy for us.

    This is why i think the bluesky exodus is going to be useful, because it may inspire new users to learn about federation, and later on, the fediverse.

    https://xkcd.com/2501


  • We definitely should make a poll to understand our demographics, eventually. Maybe i’ll do it one day. It would be a huge benefit for us users and developers.

    As for reasons why people don’t choose to try lemmy, i remember before i joined lemmy that i heard warnings of the developers and community denying genocides, making up false information, and being toxic in general etc. I also couldn’t wrap my mind around instances. That definitely soured my opinion, to be honest. Of course, now i know those are only a couple of instances that could easily be blocked, but the average user isn’t going to understand instances, federation, etc.

    The reason why bluesky was so successful was because it’s easy. It has pseudo-federation, but it ““conveniently”” chooses the main server for you. That’s why most users are on bsky.social. Simple, but incredibly centralized. It defeats the point. Also, the UI is very similar to old twitter. Lemmy/mbin are more radical in terms of differences, this makes it more niche.

    I just don’t think people are ready for the fediverse, yet. Maybe in a couple of years, people will start joining us, but for now, we’re the minority.



  • I should have specified, i was talking about classical liberalism. Social liberals are center-left to left wing.

    The way i see it, the barebones definition of right wing and left wing is that leftism supports minimization, or abolishment of hierarchy, and equality, both class and social. You don’t have to be 100% of all these points to be left wing, just a degree of it.

    The right wing believes that hierarchies are natural, and inevitable, or even desirable. They believe inequality is natural, due to social differences. Most of them believe that authority is good (not exclusive to right wing politics, there are authoritarian leftist ideologies) with libertarians and ancaps being an exception.

    Classical liberals believe in free market, and generally have negative views on social services, taxes, and such.

    Social liberals believe in a mixed economy, and favour social services, and believe in social justice (also class equality, but not a huge talking point for them). I think this makes them center, and at most, center-left (See social democracy or the nordic model). What makes them different than socialists and communists is that they are not quite radical in comparison to them, socialists desire to minimize wealth inequality (and inequality in general. politically, socially, etc) as much as possible.

    Another point that you brought up is private property. I think this is also a defining factor on why I think liberals tend to be more right leaning.

    You can still believe in markets, and be far left. Socialism, is when the workers own the means of production. It’s a pretty barebones definition, which makes it possible to have free markets, AND socialism. See Mutualism, Market Socialism, and Titoism