Maybe the reason is so good is because the corporations that inhabit the and other social media haven't made it here yet.

This hyper capitalisation of the social sphere is exactly why other feel so toxic. The fact that these platforms are run in the interests of capital and not the interests of their communities is surely clear by now.

We have to make and defend spaces that are free of the forces of capital. We have to make some some space for our own humanity to flourish.

They will come for when the incentive is there. How we respond to that is up to us.

We have to make sure not to include too many dopaminergic elements into our spaces. Everything that rewards you "out of nothing" will eventually be exploitable. It is good that we don't have too much focus on likes, favs and trends here, so far. If we keep it that way, we will prevail.

@resist_berlin @kawaiipunk It was pointed out again today that witches.town used to have all user accounts set to "666".

which is both adorably witchy and a good way to sidestep one of the more significant vectors of this problem.

@shoutcacophony @resist_berlin that is exactly the kind of strategy we need 👽 👽 👽 👽

@kawaiipunk @resist_berlin follow numbers, especially. although having all account names set to that could be an interesting exercise, heh

faves and boosts tend to be softer here than on that aviary unfortunateness place, but they're still that social media thing (tm). at least you can turn them off on individual accounts (or period), and there's no quote-RTing

@shoutcacophony @resist_berlin though there is nothing to stop corporations making nodes and then spamming everyone with advertising. I guess we will need to code our way out of that one. I see so many discussions about this issue on here.

@kawaiipunk @resist_berlin as it is, there's a lot of reliance on admins to handle that, which is mostly working, because doing things manually is still possible.

if some corporation sets up hundreds (or thousands, or more) of instances at once though, that could be a problem (or at least requiring more work, or more coding, like you said).

@resist_berlin @kawaiipunk I am even a bit dubious about displaying follower numbers. People who are followed because they have high follower numbers could be a problem. I think it's a good idea to discourage celebrity cults if possible. There's too much of that on Twitter.

@bob @resist_berlin @kawaiipunk

The commercial self-perception of the users (&/or their feeds, posts) as products, and the competition to be popular are so ingrained in society that it won't be easy to conduct and perceive a real change of attitude across free & non-free platforms.

> haven't made it here yet
- and they're unlikely to ever do. Capitalism and centralisation go hand in hand... In fact centralisation is so vital to capitailsm, the latter cannot exist if the former is not present.

@kawaiipunk It's unlikely that they will penetrate effectively. You cannot micro-target on #Mastodon; there's currently no advertising, and even if someone implemented it most instances wouldn't adopt it; obviously-corporate instances would likely be widely domain-blocked.

@kawaiipunk I wonder what will happen when the companies get here. I believe they will start buying the most popular instances and get access to our private data.

@vrcca Yes I can believe that. That's why the co-operative ownership model of .coop is so important.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

social.coop is a a coop-run corner of the fediverse, a cooperative and transparent approach to operating a social platform. We are currently closed to new memberships while we improve our internal processes and policies, and plan to re-open to new folks when that work is complete. [9/2/2018]