At first, the biggest problem was that there were TWO main alternatives: Mastodon and Bluesky. So those who left split into two groups, ending up with a dead timeline, missing out on news. (I and my “bubble” use it to keep up with Covid vaccines, politics, safety etc.)

I joined the Mastodon group, because it solves the problem of a single crazy billionaire potentially buying & enshittifying it. But I fully admit that it is not user friendly at all. People who are not in IT just want it to WORK, like Twitter used to. They don’t want to “educate themselves” about servers, fediverse and networks. The user experience clearly hasn’t even been a thing. It’s techies writing software for themselves. What it needs is a full analysis of the experience from the start: Who are you, user, why are you considering Mastodon, what are your expectations, what are the experiences in the first 30 seconds after entering “mastadon” (oh, you misspelled it?) or “twitter alternative” into a search engine, etc. “pick an instance” is already the passive-aggressive demand nobody wants to hear.

In the end, my instance was shut down without a fair warning, all the reconnected and new contacts lost, no option to move. Trying Bluesky now, but many stayed at Twitter (now X), moved to Mastodon with or without success (most onto my dead instance), or gave up on microblogging.

I think we need something simple again. I remember what SUSE did for Linux in the 90s. Linux users were all like: Only debian is even somewhat useable, but if you should really do LFS. Non-techies willing to switch for “political” or other reasons were hit in the face with “Pick a distro!!!”. SUSE has been called “the Windows among the Linux distros” by those people, but it did the right thing. It provided exactly the simplification we needed: “This is Linux, you simply buy it on CD in a retail store like your other software, you run the installer.” It was a good thing.

IRC is the one good old thing that still works great. When they tried to enshittify freenode, we just moved, collectively. Many non-IT channels & servers died after 2010, though.

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 2 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

The "just pick an instance!" and "my instance shut down" thing is a core pain point here.

BlueSky is corporately run, and it's semi-centealized. This is bad for the internet, but it's good for the user. At least on the surface. And that's what users care about. It provides a sense of stability, and an umspoken promise that if anything happens, it's the company's fault, and the company's problem.

The fediverse is run by hobbiests. You join some hobbiest's forum or microblog, it connects to a bunch of other hobbiest's forums or microblogs, and if things break, oh well, it's just a hobby! And if that hobby becomes stressful for the hobbiest, they just abandon the hobby.

Leaving the users holding the bag.

The fediverse is unstable as an end user, because, as it's currently structured, it's not really designed to have end users. It's designed to have hobbiest tinkerers. It's right in the oft repeated motto of tne of the fediverse: users should own their data!

But who owns the data in the fediverse? Who actually controls it?

Server admins.

You own your data by self-hosting.

Like a giant computer nerd.