all 65 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 87 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)
[–] 30 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (6 children)

Fediverse is better at everything except onboarding. The access methods are complicated and ill explained for users who expect an app and simple signup. Regular users have no idea what an instance is. Even people who are TRYING to join the fediverse willingly pile in lemmy.world because it’s the default on most apps. There needs to be a round robin assigner to instances that opt in in order to spread users around who don’t care which general instance they join.

The fediverse feels like old internet which I like but is also a barrier to people just looking for easy alternatives.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    I love this round robin instance assigner idea.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 2 weeks ago

    I’m know there’s things I haven’t thought of but getting them in is most important.

    Call it an incubator flag or whatever. Get them in so they can learn what all this has to offer. As they gain knowledge they can make a choice where they end up.

    Presenting a user with a list of instances with weird dorky names is the fastest way to get a normie to delete an app. Unless that’s what you want: a fedi-filter

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    Onboarding is the same as for email, which most people seem to pass just fine. Fedi instance is analogous to an email provider. I would even vouch to move from the ' instance' hosting-based terminology to the ' provider' user-centric terminology.

    IMO it's the content discovery across instances and the subtler implications of your chosen provider that are harder to grasp.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 2 weeks ago

    The average person has Gmail or Apple Mail because that's what their phone had them set up, or (unfortunately) just uses their work email for everything. They're not out there weighing alternatives.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 67 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (18 children)

    Meanwhile everyone is using Discord (still after Chinese funding, enshittification, age verification)

    A fringe moved to non federated options Fluxer Haven Stoat

    Matrix is too expensive to host, xmpp has no clients to use IRC can’t even edit a message.

  • source
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 weeks ago (8 children)
  • [–] 11 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

    If someone uploads a photo or video, the server hosts it and sends to everyone.

    Expensive

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    There are plenty of XMPP clients out there that work great... finding one that supports all the features you actually care about...now that's the hard part. XMPP has too many opt in extensions and it's very hit and miss with clients

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

    The problem is that the only one XEP that could allow for a Discord-like UX (XEP-0503: Server-Side Spaces) that, let's admit, is the best one for many (I, in example, prefer that UX over the IRC or plain contacts + MUCs list UX [like, the WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram or most XMPP clients), is only actually used in one client (Movim), and only other one has discussed implementing it (Gajim, that has something like a Client-Side Spaces impl that is really prone to break up), has only done that, discuss it.

    And why it's a Discord-like UX better, in my opinion?

    Because it allows for more structured, focused and topic-based conversation and discussion. That's why that UX has gotten so popular among not only gamers, but also among students, freelancers, creative groups, or even scientists and companies. It's less prone to become a mess than a plain list where everything is mixed up.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    A bare minimum includes: Editing, notifications, 1-1 calls, group calls voip, emoji reactions, discord servers aka matrix space aka fluxer community, mobile app.

    Sorry but nothing in the xmpp space gets close. I’m looking for a viable Discord alternative not a gTalk competitor from 10 years ago.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 15 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)
  • [–] 54 points 2 weeks ago (10 children)

    I hate the original "14 standards" xkcd comic with a passion. People should try shit and see if it works, if multiple standards works then compatibility layers/bridges will also be built.

    I'm happy that multiple DE exist, I love having multiple choice for my init system (and I say this while liking a lot of what systemD offer), bootloader, text editor, etc...

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 2 weeks ago (9 children)

    See you have to be careful because with that approach you can get a USB c situation

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    Consider me ignorant but whats the USB-C situation ?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

    Well ... Sigh in short because it is meaningless.

    As a condensed half true and a bit hyperbole summary: Usb-c is first and foremost just a connector definition. So getting a usb-c cable is basically saying you will have a cable with this plug and a specific wire configuration. But you can omit wires if you don't need them and still have a USB c cable. So from the phyisical definition this means your cable can have a plug that connects into a socket and is not wired internally at all. You can still call this a USB cable. That is why apple usb-c cables are often unable to transfer data, for example. This is done for downward compatibility with the USB standard.

    The USB standard defines the functional properties of a USB cable. Depending on which version, which can be any number between 1.0 and 3.2 or thunderbolt, you have different lower and upper bounds that are possible. Except with USB 1.0 to 3.0 you don't have lower bounds, you can omit parts of the specification completely and you can still call it a USB 2 or whatever cable. This means just because you have a USB c cable it does not give you any information about it's capabilities. Except if it is thunderbolt or USB 3.2 because these have minimum requirements.

    Because the functional and constructional definition is so wide ranged the standard does not give you any meaningful information. Which means it's basically useless.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

    ONE PLUG FOR EVERYTHING.

    just hope the plug has the right pinout, and the cable the right capacity.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

    that explains my fucking headlight what is refusing to charge about 25%. slapped a better cable on there and it's getting up to 50% now.

    i just want it to last 60 miles dammit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    That's not on USB C mate. Shitty products will always exist. Like some can only be powered/charged from USB A to C, not C to C, since they didn't add a resistor to the CC line. A microscopic sub 1 cent part.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • One thing is that, another thing is centralisation around a rigid and, sometimes, even badly aged standard just because of "you shouldn't create any more standards!".

    New standards should absolutely be created because that means that there are more options for different profiles, and also that there will be more chances for the issues on existing standards to be addressed.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 2 weeks ago

    There's DeltaChat!

    Also Fluxer, a FOSS Discord clone, is getting beta federation this year.

  • source
  • [–] 33 points 2 weeks ago (8 children)

    Someone is an optimist...

    Why photoshop an XKCD comic?

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (6 children)

    I assume they mean the new standard, good or bad as it might be, simply isn't adopted, so we are still stuck with the 14 bad ones

    Edit: I misread it, but this would also make for a good variation of the original :P

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 56 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

    I read it more like the new, better standard is never developed because someone used the real xkcd as an argument against making the new standard

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    I have another way to see it: There is a good new standard but the bad old ones stick around. Like Torx, there is still a ton of Philips etc.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 weeks ago

    Pretty sure it's trying to say these people would have maybe made a better standard, but didn't try because they read the original comic and didn't want to make a 15th shitty standard.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

    Calling IRC a shitty standard sure is a take.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)
  • [+] -2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 7 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)
  • [–] 4 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    Why use two different 4 fonts though

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    I genuinely thought it was a reference to the other four thing currently happening...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 weeks ago

    More standards! A million standards! A kaleidescope of possibilities, for every preference

  • source