Can you define “socialism”? I’m a little lost on how any social media with a hosting provider or moderator can ever be socialism.
Can you define “socialism”? I’m a little lost on how any social media with a hosting provider or moderator can ever be socialism.
They might flee into the rest of the world and learn social skills. The horror!
This plays out like things I’ve seen in real life:
In all fairness, that’s how Twitter did things from what I can understand.
Of course, that can be quite the payroll expense, especially with a weird model with a panoply of interest-based domains.
I’m sure the Reddit employees will be up to it and has all the equipment necessary for it. That protest was about the amazing internal tooling the mods loved using, right?
You’ll always have to rely on someone else, unless you build the thing yourself.
The beauty of the fediverse concept is that it’s about as easy as possible to build it yourself.
The cost of running a host is a matter of economical management:
Most open-source is funded as passion projects by devoted geeks who typically already make a living doing other computer things anyway, and fediverse is a bit of the same.
The trouble with socialism, though, is that any implementation of it strips away meaning in the process of trying to help people.
Meaning comes from a person feeling responsibility for what they do. That responsibility requires exposure to risk if they don’t act.
Almost any policy created to help people without a well-guarded limit will quickly become paternalism and, consequently, strip away meaning.