RE: https://eupolicy.social/@hpod16/116691205021254314
The point is that we should not duplicate harmful applications. Not as Open Source and not as European.
A European, open source Palantir, or Instagram or TikTok is still harmful and corrosive to democracy and people's well-being.
We don't need European or open source Torment Nexi.
@jani @tante
To be fair, it's pretty hard to see this as a "version of Twitter".
It might look like it, and have similar interface, but it serves a different function. I'd say a good part of the similarity is quite superficial.
Which I think is a big reason why people don't like it as much as Twitter or Bluesky.
Twitter/Bluesky serves more one-sided communication. Not saying that is good or bad, but I'd argue the very structure on which Mastodon operates pushes towards that.
Sure, there are accounts like @EC_DIGIT , and a bunch of other big-institution-accounts that use this exactly the same as they would use Twitter; a one way channel of communication. But that's not how mastodon operates by and large. At least from my anecdotal experience.
I'd expect it to depend more heavily on how the platform is governed than whether or not it's open-source.
If it's built by a bunch of decentralised groups like fediverse was? Of course it's going to be different.
If it's built by a single centralised entity? I'd imagine it would end up quite similar, regardless whether or not if it's open-source and European. I'd expect an European for-profit business entity to be pushed towards the exact same business goals as TikTok or any other service is.
I think a big difference is also profit motive. One thing that makes commercial social media so toxic is that the main goal is the quest for money, how that quest is accomplished is not super important. And as we all have seen by now, being a useful social network that actually facilitates good faith communication is a lot less profitable than harvesting all the information about your users, selling that information without any scruples, and using every dirty trick in the book to make your farm animals stay around.
I never tried Twitter, maybe because I'm not desperate enough to try centralized, non-free, social networks. But from what I heard, the #fediverse (incl. #Mastodon, which is what I use) is different from Twitter in many aspects.
Anyway, in case of social networks, being #freeSoftware and open in the sense of #federation is already good enough for me. Totally different thing than a #European "alternative" to #Palantir.
@tante
Facebook has useful aspects. It is connecting people.
Right now I'm active in a protest and all of the coordination is done through Whatsapp (that is at a certain stage in the enshitiffication cycle).
We need to make it easy for people to communicate and as much as possible without the harmful parts.
@harib_murshidi @tante
Right, there are. But at the moment #Whatsapp is what everybody uses. I operate a #XMPP server. I tried getting people to use it. No luck.
Whatsapp works. People use it. Calling it "crap" won't get you far with people.
@debacle @tante
There are hardly any people. I'm one of the only people who won't, and it surprises people.
It is a de-facto communication channel between people. For instance, for parents at school, for people in a building or in a neighborhood.
I manage to avoid it in some places by having friends as proxies. And generally not having it is a problem.
I see, thanks!
Data point: In my choir, official information is by email, but there are WA channels, too. So I don't get all information, or not instantaneously. Not a big deal.
(For me it begins with not having an Android/iOS smartphone. I.e. it's possible, but just too cumbersome to create an account with Whatsapp or Signal or similar services.)
@tante Facebook isn't an inherently evil app, nor is Instagram. They are made evil by algorithms designed intentionally with dark patterns.
I honestly, also, think Mastadon is pretty meh. Like, you could be designing algorithms with anti-dark patterns instead of just being like, "no algorithms allowed".
They're all defined by technological and moral choices.
@tante that's the difficulty. Understanding and communicating that the known commercial applications were made with harmful intent entering the picture pretty early, and that efforts to dismantle them and offer non-harmful and actually useful alternatives should sound different than "[commercial app], but good".
Most consumers don't want lectures. Most consumers don't want to learn how and why mastodon is not a "replacement" for Twitter, or why pixelfed is not just "instagram, but without the shit".
Most consumers just want tools and services to "just work" for them, with zero worries and a clean conscience.
Anyone even having this conversation is already a special interest group, and sure, I can try and push the boundaries and help open minds, and I do so whenever I feel it's worth trying, but it won't make nearly as much of a difference as providing something that "just works".
@tante agreed, if there's some good mixed with the overwhelming bad, it's at least necessary to call out the parts that you want to rescue/rehabilitate.
"European communication network that enables freer communication" great, but it's pretty critical how Facebook-like or Instagram-like the goal is.
If you think Facebook is great except for who owns it I want you to fail.
tante
Jani Nikula
Expertenkommision Cyberunfall
ananas
Joanie with the Good Hair 😷
Daniël Franke 
Grandmaster Bash
Ed
Debacle
Tzafrir
Father Hardstone
helpsterTee
➴➴➴Æ🜔Ɲ.Ƈꭚ⍴𝔥єɼ👩🏻💻
endolexi
Hans
HumanBeing
Spirit
DMTom
MayaMayaMaya
Jackie
Graeme 🏴
kkarhan