Compare news coverage. Spot media bias. Avoid algorithms. Try Ground News today and get 40% off your subscription by going to https://ground.news/tldr We've talked a lot about European strategic au...
The fact you’re getting downvotes to fuck shows, I think, how unrealistic a lot of people here are. Proprietary or open, a service lives or dies based on it’s uptake. Uptake requires marketing, marketing requires money, money requires investors, investors who aren’t going to spend their money on something that isn’t profitable for them and it’s hard to see how giving users control of their data and giving them the tools to turn their backs on abusive monoliths leads to profit as compared to, say, the exact opposite.
I definitely want people to have control over their data. And I like open source platforms, which is why I’m using Lemmy. But I just think if we want a European social media platform that sees widespread adoption among normal people, then such a platform would probably have proprietary elements. Surely if it was completely open source then some company could come along, take the open source stuff, bolt on some proprietary novelties, and start grabbing market share.
No no. When you start seeing the Internet as an extension of the physical world you will understand. I’m not against private but the priority here is public and open source. You don’t need marketing to use the pavement outside to walk to the park and meet your friends do you? Or to drive to work per example: some countries have tolls but there’s always a public road to get you were you need to go. The right to free social media should be a fundamental right. Also the standardisation and opening of APIs to certified entities should be mandatory. Those are basic anti-monopolistic practices.
Edit: typos/missing words
The fact you’re getting downvotes to fuck shows, I think, how unrealistic a lot of people here are. Proprietary or open, a service lives or dies based on it’s uptake. Uptake requires marketing, marketing requires money, money requires investors, investors who aren’t going to spend their money on something that isn’t profitable for them and it’s hard to see how giving users control of their data and giving them the tools to turn their backs on abusive monoliths leads to profit as compared to, say, the exact opposite.
I definitely want people to have control over their data. And I like open source platforms, which is why I’m using Lemmy. But I just think if we want a European social media platform that sees widespread adoption among normal people, then such a platform would probably have proprietary elements. Surely if it was completely open source then some company could come along, take the open source stuff, bolt on some proprietary novelties, and start grabbing market share.
No no. When you start seeing the Internet as an extension of the physical world you will understand. I’m not against private but the priority here is public and open source. You don’t need marketing to use the pavement outside to walk to the park and meet your friends do you? Or to drive to work per example: some countries have tolls but there’s always a public road to get you were you need to go. The right to free social media should be a fundamental right. Also the standardisation and opening of APIs to certified entities should be mandatory. Those are basic anti-monopolistic practices. Edit: typos/missing words