If it’s any consolation, the admins of .ml will likely indefinitely host .ml with or without the support of patrons funding the development of Lemmy. Your support or lack thereof will never affect its operation.

Hmmm, you might have a case but maybe not.

The US Copyright office currently does not recognize protections for AI-generated works, and for portions of complete works that are AI-generated. For example, if a comic has graphics generated by AI but a script written by people, the graphics and character likenesses, etc are not protected by copyright.

For audiobooks, the original work and the accompanying recording are both protected by copyright. The audiobook is considered a derivative work, so it may still be protected based on the fact that the original work is rightfully protected by copyright.

Fediverse can’t sustain many niche communities with its level of activity. Even gaming communities on lemmy don’t have enough traffic to constitute communities for individual games. I can’t do after-episode TV discussions on Lemmy because there wouldn’t be enough people commenting to warrant it. If I wanted to search for a D&D game in my local community (a huge US city), I couldn’t do it via Lemmy.

I can do all this on reddit, which I intend for Lemmy to replace, but I can’t do that yet. So I still crawl reddit for the needs Lemmy can’t replace, but I’d rather never have to open reddit in the first place.

Same is true for every alternative platform on Fediverse. I’m still using all the mainstream apps I intend to replace.

Ironically, I think Fediverse suffers from a high amount of tech expertise and not enough project managers, lol. Not enough people cracking the whip saying “users said x feels confusing, what can we do about it?” then establishing timelines and check-ins. Maybe instead of Lemmy devs saying, “we accept nearly every pull request,” they should say, “we want a project manager to help recruit volunteers on specific issues x, y, and z”.

Here’s a cleaned-up version of your Lemmy post that keeps your tone but improves clarity, flow, and grammar:

Did they forget to delete ChatGPT’s bit or did they intentionally copy the whole thing lol

I maintain my old hotmail account, but I also have 3 different gmail accounts. I also have a google account associated with my hotmail account so I can do things like keep a calendar and use Google docs with it. I imagine lots of people don’t realize you can make a Google account with an existing email, so they just switch.

There was a lot of energy around strategy when I joined in January (can you guess why? Lol). The limiting factor seems to be chosen participation. Lots of people have opinions, not many people want to organize their thoughts into, eg. an effective advertising campaign, a github pull request, or basically anything other than meaningless musing.

Here were some threads in my message history I found insightful: https://lemmy.world/post/25512565 https://lemmy.world/post/25553607 https://lemmy.world/post/27824597

I’m not really skilled in anything relevant, so my strategy has been:

• On mainstream social platforms, point out any hint of enshittification and follow up with a recommendation toward a specific Fediverse alternative.
• Link directly to discussions or articles I found on Lemmy that I thought were worth sharing
• Building partnerships in my existing communities with the corresponding Lemmy communities to encourage user flow

The point is outreach to the other platform. Sending engagement to this video on YouTube will boost it due to YouTube’s algorithm. More exposure on YouTube = more potential new PeerTube users. Publishing this on PeerTube is preaching to the choir. As an alternative platform, you always need to maintain a presence on the main platform so you can encourage people looking to leave.

I manage a community on discord and see it going down the aggressive monetization route day by day. Also looked at Matrix, but the basic tools to support my community just aren’t there. I’m hoping the next two or so years produces an alternative rich chat/voice/video platform.

Okay let me rephrase. I’m offering 100% of my work on PeerTube for free. They’re high quality, long-form video essays, and people clearly enjoy watching them. I link my Patreon in case people wish to support, but no other product exists on a subscription basis.

Even if PeerTube were substantially more popular, the lack of recommendation algorithms would keep my content from proliferating nearly as well as YouTube. This translates to fewer Patreon subscribers which means less opportunity and funding to create high quality videos. No self-promotion, just content that can’t perform as well because it doesn’t get recommended.

Goodhart’s Law: “When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.”

Not entirely sure how this applies to the discussion, it just came to mind lol

I’m so sorry but you really need to reevaluate this because it categorizes like 80% of authentic internet content as ads. Is a graphic artist who works commission posting their art on social media an ad, if they’re doing it to hunt for commission? A streamer who posts their funniest clips on social media to get more paid subscribers? A game dev promo-ing features in their next game patch?

I’m not talking about ads. Let’s say I’m a video essayist and I publish my essays on PeerTube. The recommendation algorithms aren’t going to show the free content I make to nearly as many people as if I put them on YouTube or Tiktok. And overall, that translates to fewer Patreon subscribers, FAR fewer.

From a content creation standpoint, it does kind of suck. There’s no ego about it. The system doesn’t carry your content to nearly as many eyes, even accounting for the reduced audience. Discovery and suggestion algorithms are extremely effective, and if I’m trying to get my stuff to reach as much of my audience as possible, I wouldn’t only be on Mastodon. I’m not just talking about mediocre content either - even extremely motivating stuff in the niche doesn’t generate even a small fraction of engagement as regular social media sites.

For some people, this is a benefit - it’s a poorly commodified system. For small content creators trying to build an audience and generate paid subscribers, it’s not enough. Most creators on Fediverse are contributing as a free or non-profit hobby.

It’s hard for me to imagine any system as flexible as Lemmy communities NOT operating under centralized control, outside of notional attempts at democratic procedures held by the community owner themselves.

Completely right OP, and this is worth repeating as MUCH as possible. More than almost any UX or intake changes, Fediverse will only grow if their experience of the community is good.

Unfortunately, some people have never caught a vibe in their life and it shows lol. A single person with a bad attitude can completely tank your experience in a small community, versus a 20,000 person subreddit where usernames are basically indistinguishable.

Technically anyone can spin up an instance centered on whatever dark and inhumane topic. That’s the reality of an open network. That’s why defederation and whitelisting are such important tools as Fediverse grows. You don’t actually want access to every last bit of information on the network.

YouTube was founded by 3 former PayPal employees and bought by Google for $1.65 billion just over a year after its creation. It launched its partner program in 2007 which is when people could start directly making money from the site - but for most big people on the platform, making money was the eventual goal anyway. There was always a plan for YouTube to make oodles of cash and for people to make money making videos on it.

If PeerTube doesn’t have some type of monetary incentive, nobody except for mild hobbyists making subpar content are going to migrate over.

Absolutely agreed that market capture is unethical, but that doesn’t have much to do with the legal basis of right to repair cases.

When written out like this, it seems simple as - but the most simple version really isn’t what’s at stake. Companies make and trademark specialized tools for their goods, to prevent third parties from providing repairs. Warrantys are written to keep a company from being liable for repair/replacement if a customer attempts to repair a product themselves.

Pretty much every case in the right to repair movement is a challenge to a legally acceptable means of market capture, that just happens to create a stupendously shitty consumer environment.