Not here, no. It does on Mastodon and other microblogs, though.
Kichae
joined 2 years ago
I was still seeing people use them as of 1995, but it wasn't that common. At least, not on IRC. Not sure what the style was on Usenet or BBSes
Is this a community discovery issue, though? If it's a popular post in an unpopulated community, people must be seeing it. So, it doesn't sound like an issue with impressions.
It's an issue with conversions. With visibility not translating unto subscriptions. And that's a totally different problem. If I see a post in Local or in All, and it's interesting, I'll upvote it, but that's not going to get me to subscribe. For that, I need to a) be interested in the community topic according to its name (because I am not clicking into the community), and b) I need to see multiple interesting posts from that community. And if those thresholds are reached, and I subscribe, that doesn't secure my engagement. Just that you'll show up in my Subscribed feed.
All of those are hurdles for a nascent community, and neither are a discoverability issue.
There could definitely be better ranking options for feeds, but if the posts in question are already "popular", that doesn't seem to be the issue.
Boosting re-sends the original message, with the original message id attached, and both Lemmy and mbin filter filter out duplicates. On Lemmy, upvoting a post boosts it, and on mbin the functions are separate. Boosting works to get the community/magazine group actor to re-send the post to subscribed remote sites, so if the site you're using subscribed to a community after the original post was made, it could now receive it thanks to the boost.
Well, it is a photo sharing platform.
That's heavy
He creates shareholder value. That's all that publically trades companies do. It's their goal.
Everything else is just ways they attempt to do that, and someone like Elon does it with hype, since the agencies that are supposed to prevent such nonsense abandoned their responsibilities a long time ago.
Tesla stocks are now a ponzi scheme. At some point, someone'll be left holding the bag.
It's not unsocial. It's just not mirroring multi-gigabyte files by default. It's perfectly social if you use the website.
Everyone has to stop conflating the technology with the network. Lemmy is a website engine. PeerTube is a website engine. The ability to mirror content is not inherent to running a Lemmy- or PeerTube-based website. The network is not the primary object here.
It is a construct that arrises from content-mirroring.
Remember, federation is copying, not creating some kind of remote view. If you're federating videos, you're letting other websites consume terabytes of your storage space amd bandwidth.
It makes perfect sense if you've spent any time examining what's being fed to people on YouTube and TikTok
No. I think it works to hide the distributed nature of the fediverse, and works to make things that are inherent to a distributed model seem uncanney and broken.
It also strips some value out of the 'local' experience, communicating that each Mastodon-based website is the same as any other, and presenting something that looks like a dumb terminal, rather than a stand-alone website.
Ultimately, I think it's bad for the fediverse.
B A B A ↑ ↓ B A ← → B A Start
It's literally what federation is. It's why discovery doesn't work the way people expect.
Do you mean to say that PeerTube at least embeds videos? Because that's news to me, and welcomed news at that