There are a lot of reasons why. Mastodon apps are not pretty. The logo is not attractive. The signup where you need to pick the server for some reason is confusing. The reputation Mastodon already has among the general public, that it’s the place for Linux enthusiasts, is not doing it any more favors.
You say that the algorithms have ruined everything but it’s just not true. Discoverability is dead on Mastodon. The platform doesn’t suggest me any new people to follow. The vocal minority against the recommendation algorithms is just that, a vocal minority. Recommendations are useful if they are not obtrusive.
I’ve been trying to keep my Mastodon account active for two years and I’ve been posting some random shit the same way I did on Twitter. I’ve been looking for some fun idiots but there are none, it’s all uptight serious people who are honestly pretty insufferable to read. I deleted my Mastodon account half a year ago and the one thing I appreciate is how easy it was — just a couple of clicks and you’re done.
And most importantly - there isn’t millions of dollars spent to market it to people. You have to go out of your way to learn about Mastodon or federation in general, and as you say, their reputations precede them.
There are a lot of reasons why. Mastodon apps are not pretty. The logo is not attractive.
Ivory is more or less Tweetbot for Mastodon which is miles ahead of any other client for either platform as far as visuals go. Logo is is debatable.
The signup where you need to pick the server for some reason is confusing.
Only “confusing” on many of the open source offerings since they weren’t made with general users in mind.
The reputation Mastodon already has among the general public, that it’s the place for Linux enthusiasts, is not doing it any more favors.
?
You say that the algorithms have ruined everything but it’s just not true.
When was the last time you heard someone embrace hate on the internet? The whole point of algorithms is to fuel engagement which is done best with controversial content targeting polar opposites.
The platform doesn’t suggest me any new people to follow.
It does, you have the initial list which features popular users like eugen, george takei, etc. in the recommended users carousel. You can also go to explore people to see recommendations based on who you follow and who those you follow follow. Perhaps I should have been clear that the problem users feel is content algorithms trying to bait engagement, which is something Mastodon, unlike every other platform out there, doesn’t do - because it’s psychological hell fueled entirely by hatred and while it drives addiction it entirely removes any rich content, constructive debate or interests, which I’d assume was the MAIN reason people wanted to be on social media in the first place, but you can’t have that if you want an addictive platform.
I’ve been trying to keep my Mastodon account active for two years and I’ve been posting some random shit the same way I did on Twitter. I’ve been looking for some fun idiots but there are none, it’s all uptight serious people who are honestly pretty insufferable to read. I deleted my Mastodon account half a year ago and the one thing I appreciate is how easy it was — just a couple of clicks and you’re done.
So it’s a you problem. If you haven’t setup any hashtags or accounts then obviously you’re not going to see any relevant content to your interests. I’m not sure what you mean by fun idiots but I’ve blocked plenty of both hashtags and users on Mastodon because they’re the type of individual who thrive on hostility, so there’s plenty of that shit if that’s what you like. Just gotta go look for it.
I use both. I’ve been on Mastodon for the better part of a year and only actively tried Bluesky the last couple weeks. My Bluesky feed is thriving, whereas Mastodon not so much. IMO this is due to Mastodon is missing the major quality of life features of Bluesky.
Add lists
Subscribable block lists
Custom subscribable topic feeds
Optional recommendation engine
These things make Bluesky very easy to get started with and more powerful even than Xitter was. It’s simply a better product if you have any requirements other than federation. Getting a good feed up and running doesn’t take more than an hour or two. Mastodon is a lot more work.
Yes, its federation is more or less bullshit, but for most users, that feature is a distant priority when compared to the rest.
I tend to use Twitter if I’m talking about the pre-Musk infused flavor and Xitter for the Musky turd flavor. Since we must compare features to the now-existing platform, I used the new naming convention ;-).
In almost every thread where this has come up, people have gone into extensive detail about why.
There are a number of you either missing or ignoring it. Which I guess is why the comment sections for these articles are always almost exactly the same.
The average person is tech illiterate, so having them understand what a “federated platform” is, is too much to ask. It may be easy for you or me, but we’re here on Lemmy, so that immediately makes us not the average.
The average person also doesn’t care what a federated platform is. They just want something that is convenient and works. Same as the above point; maybe we would be willing to sit down and figure things out, but others will consider that a waste of time and makes something bad.
In that sense, federated platforms are a major failure, as picking instances and creating accounts is a hassle rather than a convenience.
From personal experience, trying to find a Mastodon instance to make an account on was irritating. Some rules were too restrictive, some rules were too vague, other rules looked like they were created for sensitive little snowflakes. It was like reading through the rules of Discord servers. Not a good look for a social media platform.
Something like Bluesky tries to be both; a platform without algorithms (or only user-created algorithms that you can choose to subscribe to), where you can make your own instance or just be part of its centralised instance. The fact that the overwhelming number of people choose the latter should tell you enough about what people want.
Whether a platform is federated or not is an abstract and irrelevant question to most users. It’s like telling a typical end user that their hardware architecture is big-endian or little-endian. In terms of their usage, it makes no difference.
federated platforms are a major failure, as picking instances and creating accounts is a hassle rather than a convenience
Some UI improvements and simple affordances could make a bit difference to those barriers.
and don’t say algorithms. the general public constantly laments about how algorithms have ruined everything.
Right, right. Much the same way the American public complains that fast food has ruined their health and yet 2/3 of the nation is overweight. Or how chain smokers know full well their lungs are fucked six ways to Sunday but they keep reaching for those nicotine hits. It’s almost like people say they hate the things they continue to reach for all the time. Funny, that.
Do I think the Fedi is reasonably within the grasp of understanding for most of the general public? Sure. But do I think anything on the Fedi stands a ghost of a chance in competition against centralized services that cater to the dopamine rush people are already conditioned to expect and continue to reach for even when several of them claim to hate it? Oh fuck no, absolutely not.
If they’re is anything my we’ve learned from this last election cycle, it’s that the general public will trade superior and nuanced for inferior and simple every single time.
I mean, yes, addiction is hell of a drug? Doesn’t necessarily mean it’s what users crave, just why they keep coming back for more. But users used to come back for genuine content too, before algorithms were built to optimize ragebait engagement for maximum advertisement profits.
Doesn’t necessarily mean it’s what users crave, just why they keep coming back for more.
Yes. And they do come back for more. A lot more. More than “genuine content” ever made them do. It is very much the intended effect, and it is demonstrably working as intended.
So why is it that when a platform like Bluesky does gangbusters while Mastodon languishes looking to pick up table scraps, people here treat it like a wild mystery?
The Fediverse is a cure to an addiction very few people actually want cured; at least, based on their actions taken to solve it. That’s how addictions work. Even people who recognize the harm and say they want out actively choose to not get out when presented an exit.
The Fediverse would succeed if it was the only choice. But in a head-to-head competition with a competently-built centralized platform that dabbles in all the trapping features its predecessor did, it’s severely outmoded.
the general public constantly laments about how algorithms have ruined everything.
It’s like the idiots on Facebook complaining that every image was generated by AI. (I have elderly relatives, FB’s the only easy way to keep in touch with them).
this is the only argument repeated and no one ever comes up with exactly how it’s not for the general public, only that it isn’t.
and don’t say algorithms. the general public constantly laments about how algorithms have ruined everything.
There are a lot of reasons why. Mastodon apps are not pretty. The logo is not attractive. The signup where you need to pick the server for some reason is confusing. The reputation Mastodon already has among the general public, that it’s the place for Linux enthusiasts, is not doing it any more favors.
You say that the algorithms have ruined everything but it’s just not true. Discoverability is dead on Mastodon. The platform doesn’t suggest me any new people to follow. The vocal minority against the recommendation algorithms is just that, a vocal minority. Recommendations are useful if they are not obtrusive.
I’ve been trying to keep my Mastodon account active for two years and I’ve been posting some random shit the same way I did on Twitter. I’ve been looking for some fun idiots but there are none, it’s all uptight serious people who are honestly pretty insufferable to read. I deleted my Mastodon account half a year ago and the one thing I appreciate is how easy it was — just a couple of clicks and you’re done.
And most importantly - there isn’t millions of dollars spent to market it to people. You have to go out of your way to learn about Mastodon or federation in general, and as you say, their reputations precede them.
I use both. I’ve been on Mastodon for the better part of a year and only actively tried Bluesky the last couple weeks. My Bluesky feed is thriving, whereas Mastodon not so much. IMO this is due to Mastodon is missing the major quality of life features of Bluesky.
These things make Bluesky very easy to get started with and more powerful even than Xitter was. It’s simply a better product if you have any requirements other than federation. Getting a good feed up and running doesn’t take more than an hour or two. Mastodon is a lot more work.
Yes, its federation is more or less bullshit, but for most users, that feature is a distant priority when compared to the rest.
You can dead name Twitter. People will know what you’re talking about haha.
I tend to use Twitter if I’m talking about the pre-Musk infused flavor and Xitter for the Musky turd flavor. Since we must compare features to the now-existing platform, I used the new naming convention ;-).
In almost every thread where this has come up, people have gone into extensive detail about why.
There are a number of you either missing or ignoring it. Which I guess is why the comment sections for these articles are always almost exactly the same.
The reason given is always about features that already exists.
No it’s not.
Enlighten me.
Here are some:
The average person is tech illiterate, so having them understand what a “federated platform” is, is too much to ask. It may be easy for you or me, but we’re here on Lemmy, so that immediately makes us not the average.
The average person also doesn’t care what a federated platform is. They just want something that is convenient and works. Same as the above point; maybe we would be willing to sit down and figure things out, but others will consider that a waste of time and makes something bad.
In that sense, federated platforms are a major failure, as picking instances and creating accounts is a hassle rather than a convenience.
From personal experience, trying to find a Mastodon instance to make an account on was irritating. Some rules were too restrictive, some rules were too vague, other rules looked like they were created for sensitive little snowflakes. It was like reading through the rules of Discord servers. Not a good look for a social media platform.
Something like Bluesky tries to be both; a platform without algorithms (or only user-created algorithms that you can choose to subscribe to), where you can make your own instance or just be part of its centralised instance. The fact that the overwhelming number of people choose the latter should tell you enough about what people want.
Whether a platform is federated or not is an abstract and irrelevant question to most users. It’s like telling a typical end user that their hardware architecture is big-endian or little-endian. In terms of their usage, it makes no difference.
Some UI improvements and simple affordances could make a bit difference to those barriers.
Right, right. Much the same way the American public complains that fast food has ruined their health and yet 2/3 of the nation is overweight. Or how chain smokers know full well their lungs are fucked six ways to Sunday but they keep reaching for those nicotine hits. It’s almost like people say they hate the things they continue to reach for all the time. Funny, that.
Do I think the Fedi is reasonably within the grasp of understanding for most of the general public? Sure. But do I think anything on the Fedi stands a ghost of a chance in competition against centralized services that cater to the dopamine rush people are already conditioned to expect and continue to reach for even when several of them claim to hate it? Oh fuck no, absolutely not.
If they’re is anything my we’ve learned from this last election cycle, it’s that the general public will trade superior and nuanced for inferior and simple every single time.
Nobody ever lost money underestimating the intelligence of the general public
I mean, yes, addiction is hell of a drug? Doesn’t necessarily mean it’s what users crave, just why they keep coming back for more. But users used to come back for genuine content too, before algorithms were built to optimize ragebait engagement for maximum advertisement profits.
Yes. And they do come back for more. A lot more. More than “genuine content” ever made them do. It is very much the intended effect, and it is demonstrably working as intended.
So why is it that when a platform like Bluesky does gangbusters while Mastodon languishes looking to pick up table scraps, people here treat it like a wild mystery?
The Fediverse is a cure to an addiction very few people actually want cured; at least, based on their actions taken to solve it. That’s how addictions work. Even people who recognize the harm and say they want out actively choose to not get out when presented an exit.
The Fediverse would succeed if it was the only choice. But in a head-to-head competition with a competently-built centralized platform that dabbles in all the trapping features its predecessor did, it’s severely outmoded.
It’s like the idiots on Facebook complaining that every image was generated by AI. (I have elderly relatives, FB’s the only easy way to keep in touch with them).
Because the general public is fucking stupid and Lemmy requires a bare minimum level of intelligence to understand