Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
Top-level
JudeNunga

@atomicpoet

Maybe "we" should just enjoy what we have, social media that doesn't rely on $$ and is run and built by people because they want to?

Why does it always have to come down to people making money?

What is happening now is done through co-ops and crowdfunding, it may not provide a "living" for people, but that's ok.

The Fediverse already exists, it doesn't need building. It has been built. It doesn't need perpetual growth, as it doesn't have to provide increasing profit, it doesn't have to follow the commercial tech methodology.

It's not broken, it works just fine, it doesn't have to cater to the whole effing world, it doesn't have to compete with FB or twatter or whatever commercial rubbish is out there, it can just be what it is.

11 comments
Chris Trottier replied to JudeNunga

@JudeNunga Because work is work, and people should be compensated for it.

Do you work for free?

JudeNunga replied to Chris

@atomicpoet

lol sure. I do a lot of "work" for free, have done my whole life.

If I work at something I want to do, then it's my choice to do that, I don't expect to be "compensated" by others.

No one is forcing people to use social media, in fact we've done quite well without it for centuries. No one is forcing people to host instances on the Fediverse, or actually even asking people to do it, people do stuff for their own satisfaction, not everyone wants to exploit others for money.

Chris Trottier replied to JudeNunga

@JudeNunga How do you feed, clothe, and shelter yourself?

JudeNunga replied to Chris

@atomicpoet

By selling my labour, or by doing the work of providing these things for myself, eg: I grow my own food.

Capitalism means that people work for profit, it's how the majority of humans have decided they want to live, to exploit others for profit. The profit has been increasingly concentrated in the hands of very few.

It doesn't mean it's the only way.

The Fediverse doesn't have to follow the exploitative tenets of capitalism and greed. It can be different.

Chris Trottier replied to JudeNunga

@JudeNunga That’s right. You sell your labour.

And people who write software, administrate instances, and provide content are providing labour that others are willing to pay for. So why not give them the means to make a living?

As you already noted, the Fediverse can be different *if* we prove and build a different, more sustainable model. Which could include — but isn’t limited to — crowdfunding, non-profits, and co-ops.

JudeNunga replied to Chris

@atomicpoet

If people are willing to pay for their work, I don't have an issue with that.

However if people don't want to pay for something they see no need for, I have no issue with that either.

The Fediverse already has crowdfunding, non profits and co ops, it already exists, are you suggesting building another one? Why?

Improvements can be made, but if people are happy with what already exists, and don't see a need for more, than they aren't going to be interested in paying for more.

Chris Trottier replied to JudeNunga

@JudeNunga I’m suggesting that people consider crowdfunding, non-profits, and co-ops.

And again, not everyone is considering them as alternatives to Big Tech.

JudeNunga replied to Chris

@atomicpoet

I have no argument with that at all.

IMO "big tech" will fail to make any inroads on the Fediverse, but this of course is just my opinion. Trust has been destroyed, and it is extremely hard to rebuild that.

TeaPolitics replied to Chris

@atomicpoet @JudeNunga
Would you turn down a donation from Microsoft?

TeaPolitics replied to Chris

@atomicpoet @JudeNunga
In a purely hypothetical case, it would make sense for them to beef up a particular instance so that it drives users away from Meta/Twitter, which should in theory drive more instance makers to consider hosting via Azure.

Also I wouldnt put it past them to offer deep discounts on hosting instances for the same purpose.

Go Up