friendica.eskimo.com
I don't like the clickbait title at all -- Mastodon's clearly going to survive, at least for the forseeable future, and it wouldn't surprise me if it outlives Xitter.
Still, Mastodon is struggling; most of the people who checkd it out in the November 2022 surge (or the smaller June 2023 surge) didn't stick around, and numbers have been steadily declining for the last year. The author makes some good points, and some of the comments are excellent.
Because Threads and BlueSky form effective competition with Twitter.
Also, short form content with just a few sentences per post sucks. It's become obvious. That Twitter was mostly algorithm hype and FOMO.
Mastodon tries to be healthier but I'm not convinced that microblogs in general are that useful, especially to a techie audience who knows RSS and other publishing formats.
@dragontamer @The Nexus of Privacy
"short form content with just a few sentences per post sucks"
I agree and that's why the first site I put up was friendica, but I find on friendica, even though people have the space to express their thoughts in depth and eloquently, few do so, so perhaps Mastodon is so successful because it appeals to people who are incapable of effective self expression. At any rate, it is a reality that it is, so I do run one of those also.
What are some of the issues you'd like to see addressed? I don't use mastodon as much so I'm not familiar with what has / hasn't been done.
ex. I hear they've been working on content discovery, such as with the recommended accounts carousel
erinkissane.com/mastodon-is-ea… is a good overview (not by me!) of issues that the November 2022 wave ran into. What's frustrating is that so many of these are very similar to the issues the April 2017 wave ran into!
Release 4.3 did some work on the recommended accounts, that's good, but the problems start even before that. What instance to sign up to? Most people have better experiences on smaller instances that match either their interests or their geography ... but how to find them? mastodon.social is (for most people) kind of meh -- certainly not the worst, but it's not all that well-moderated, and it's big enough that the local feed isn't useful for finding interesting people or stuff -- and that's now the default. Also it took over a year to get 4.3 out; I get it, they're a small team, some stuff turned out to be a lot harder than expected, and they had to deal with a bunch of security patches in the interim ... still, that means progress is frustratingly slow.
A very informal inquiry into why some people on the Bluesky network didn't have a great time when they tried using Mastodon in the period leading up to the summer of 2023.erinkissane.com
short form content with just a few sentences per post sucks.
I 100% agree with this sentiment.
Jaron Lanier has a great book called You Are Not A Gadget, where he talks about the way we design and interact with systems, and he has some thoughts I think reflect this sentiment very well:
"When [people] design an internet service that is edited by a vast anonymous crowd, they are suggesting that a random crowd of humans is an organism with a legitimate point of view." (This is in reference to Wikis like Wikipedia)"Different media designs stimulate different potentials in human nature."
He talks about how when a system becomes popular enough, it can "lock in" a design, when others build upon it as standard. Such as how the very concept of a "file" is one we created, and nearly every system now uses it. Non-file based computing is a highly unexplored design space.
And the key part, which I think is relevant to Mastodon, the fediverse, and social media more broadly, is this quote:
"A design that share's Twitter's feature of providing ambient continuous contact between people could perhaps drop Twitter's adoration of fragments."
Fragments, of course, meaning the limited, microblogging style of communication the platform allows for.
I've seen some Mastodon instances that help with this, by not imposing character limits anywhere near where most instances would, opting for tens of thousands of characters long. But of course, there is still a limit. Another design feature by Twitter that is now locked in.
But of course, people are used to that style of social media. It's what feels normal, inevitable even. Changing it would mean having to reconceptualize social media as a concept, and might be something people aren't interested in, since they're too used to the original design. We can't exactly tell.
As Lanier puts it,
"We don't really know, because it is an unexplored design space."
Non-file based computing is a highly unexplored design space.
No it isn't; that's what databases are.
I'm not a big expert on database technology, but I am aware of there being at least a few database systems ("In-Memory") that use the RAM of the computer for transient storage, and since RAM doesn't use files as a concept in the same way, the data stored there isn't exactly inside a "file," so to speak.
That said, they are absolutely dwarfed by the majority of databases, which use some kind of file as a means to store the database, or the contents within it.
Obviously, that's not to say using files is bad in any way, but the possibilities for how database software could have developed, had we not used files as a core computing concept during their inception, are now closed off. We simply don't know what databases could have looked like, because of "lock-in."
That's what some databases are. Most databases you'll see today still inevitably store the whole contents of the DB within a file with its own format, metadata, file extension, etc, or store the contents of the database within a file tree.
The notion of "lock in" being used here doesn't necessarily mean that alternatives don't or can't exist, but that comparatively, investment into development, and usage, of those systems, is drastically lower.
Think of how many modern computing systems involve filesystems as a core component of their operation, from databases, to video games, to the structure of URLs, which are essentially usually just ways to access a file tree. Now think of how many systems are in use that don't utilize files as a concept.
The very notion of files as an idea is so locked-in, that we can rarely fathom, let alone construct a system that doesn't utilize them as a part of its function.
Regardless, the files example specifically wasn't exactly meant to be a direct commentary on the state of microblogging platforms, or of all technology, but more an example for analogy purposes than anything else.
What social media platforms don't have some kind of character limit?
What platforms don't use a feed?
What platforms don't use a like button?
What platforms don't have some kind of hashtags?
All of these things are locked-in, not necessarily technologically, but socially.
Would more people from Reddit have switched to Lemmy if it didn't have upvotes and downvotes? Are there any benefits or tradeoffs to including or not including the Save button on Lemmy, and other social media sites? We don't really know, because it's substantially less explored as a concept.
The very notion of federated communities on Lemmy being instance-specific, instead of, say, instances all collectively downloading and redistributing any posts to a specific keyword acting as a sort of global community not specific to any one instance, is another instance of lock-in, adapted from the fediverse's general design around instance-specific hosting and connection.
In the world of social media, alternative platforms, such as Minus exist, that explore unique design decisions not available on other platforms, like limited total post counts, vague timestamps, and a lack of likes, but compared to all the other sites in the social media landscape, it's a drop in the bucket.
The broader point I was trying to make was just that the very way microblogging developed as a core part of social media's design means that any shift away from it likely won't actually gain traction with a mainstream audience, because of the social side of the lock-in.
I think because when it comes to Instagram or Twitter type social media more people probably use it only to follow accounts and have no interest in being involved in it. So closer to treating it like a rss reader than something like lemmy or reddit. And conversation feed sucks in general.
I use squawker for Twitter. Can't comment, like, sub, or whatever and account follows are just local feeds like Stealth for Reddit or NewPipe or Freetube. And that's all I need from it.
because its name is Mastodon, something that when people google it pulls up a band.
Also because it's trying to be a hot fresh new thing but it's literally named after an animal that's extinct.
If it had a catchier and more unique name it probably would have caught on more.
i have a mastodon account but it’s completely useless for me.
the only thing i use twitter for is to follow updates and news from professional journalists and artists who are not on mastodon and likely will never be. if your job depends on twitter, switching to mastodon is not going to happen.
if i want to engage with random average people, i come here to lemmy.
You may have heard of Folsom Street Fair? The sex & kink positive, all-inclusive, world-famous, 2-day long, San Francisco street fair?
For the first time in over 2 decades of attending my husband and I were turned away from the new, unmarked, Trans & Non-Binary Gate & Safe Space because we weren’t, nor did we identify, as such.
Mastodon is pretty different to its competitors. It looks similar to Twitter / Bluesky, but the way the social network functions is completely different.
It's designed to be anti-infuencer... One of the things I hate about most social media platforms is a few people get all the attention. There are a few reasons for this, but it's not really based on merit.
I think a lot of people joined Mastodon wanting a Twitter clone. It's obviously not and Bluesky is, so people moved there. The approach Mastodon takes is far from perfect, and may not work out in the long run. But it seems like it's worth at least trying something different.
Let's see:
Network effect hits Mastodon specially hard as it competes not just with Twitter, but also Threads and Bluesky. In those situations, a smaller userbase means that people will outright ignore you as an option.
The way that federation was implemented; as linearchaos mentioned in another thread, if you settle in a smaller instance (the "right" thing to do), you won't get "good collections of off node traffic". So it creates a situation where, if you know how federation works you'll avoid big instances, and worsen your own experience; and if you don't, well, Mastodon's big selling point goes down the drain.
Federation itself introduces a complexity cost. That's unavoidable and the benefits of federation outweigh the cost by far; however, the cost is concrete while the bigger benefit is far more abstract.
Branding issues. Other users already mentioned it, but you don't sell a novel tech named after an extinct animal.
And this is just conjecture from my part, but I think that microblogging is becoming less popular than it used to be; people who like short content would rather go watch a TikTok video, and people who want well-thought content already would rather read a "proper" blog instead.
On a lighter side: the very fact that we're using the ActivityPub now helps Mastodon, even if we're in different platforms (like Lemmy, MBin, PieFed, SubLinks). Due to how federation works, you're bound to see someone in Mastodon sharing content with those forums and vice versa; it could be a bit less clunky but it's still more content for both sides.
On the text: I think that the author reached the right conclusion through the wrong reasoning. The activity peaks don't matter that much, when there's a huge influx of users you're bound to see some leaving five minutes later. The reason why Mastodon is struggling is this:
See those slopes down? They show that the stable userbase is shrinking. Even users engaged enough with the platform are slowly leaving, but newbies who could fill their place aren't popping up.
I disagree with your and the author's conclusions.
I have made my own long comment about it in thread, so here I am going to focus on your chart.
First, I will accept the data of the chart at face value, it seems resonably accurate and I don't have any other data to work off of.
My point is that you are interpreting it wrong.
To me the declining slopes after the sruges are not relevant to any long term conclusions, they follow a highly predictable curve and doesn't mean much.
If you look at the end of the graphs you can even see it growing slightly, that is obviously not evidence of anything yet, but to me it is an indication of either a start of another surge, or stability.
I believe you are too quick at spreading doom for Mastodon, give it half a year and look at the stats then, we won't see a meteoric rise of active users any time soon, just accept it and work with more realistic expectations.
First, I will accept the data of the chart at face value, it seems resonably accurate and I don’t have any other data to work off of.
If you do find another source of data, please post it. Relying on a single source (like the Fediverse Observer) is problematic, I know.
To me the declining slopes after the sruges are not relevant to any long term conclusions, they follow a highly predictable curve and doesn’t mean much.
You're conflating the sharp drops after the surges with the declining slopes.
The sharp drops (like MAU from 12/2022 to 02/2023) go as you said, they don't mean much. However, the declining slopes are relevant - they span across multiple months (up to ten), and show that Mastodon userbase has a consistent tendency to shrink.
If you look at the end of the graphs you can even see it growing slightly, that is obviously not evidence of anything yet, but to me it is an indication of either a start of another surge, or stability.
We'll only know if it's an indication of a surge (sudden influx of new users), or growth (slow influx), or stability in the future. For now it's an isolated data point.
I believe you are too quick at spreading doom for Mastodon
I'm saying that Mastodon is struggling. I did not say that Mastodon is doomed.
The difference is important here because a struggling network can be still saved, while a doomed one can't.
Mastodon is not struggling.
Looking at two surges of new users seeing the vast majority not stick around and missing that a sizable chunk still stayed is missing the point.
This article would never have been written if the user increase didn't have temporary surges, that result would be the same number of users, but less brand recognition.
Mastodon is also not driven by the same kind of metrics as a centralized system, plenty of people can just run their own instance just for the fun of it, they don't need constant growth.
So calm down, and take it slow.
Don't sell Mastodon short.
I tried to replace Twitter by Mastodon but, in the end, I just left Twitter and don’t use Mastodon at all. The main reason I think is because the « onboarding » is painful. I never succeeded to find interesting people to follow. I faced many ghost accounts from people posting once a month or stopped a few years ago.
If you don’t find people by yourself, no one is going to see your posts and so, you won’t be able to find new people to follow by posting.
I don’t like what Twitter became, but the base principle of the algorithm (before it became X with the paid subscriptions) was working great for me. I was constantly adding new people to the mix, and removing inactive ones every month.
If I struggled this much with Mastodon, I am not surprised many people create an account and leave a few days / weeks later.
