• Kalcifer@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    2·
    7 days ago

    Signal isn’t federated [1][2][3.1]; it’s decentralized [1][2][3.2]. Though, for all practical purposes, I would generally argue that it’s centralized.

    References
    1. Signal-Server. signalapp. Github. Published: 2025-01-31T15:34:14.000Z. Accessed: 2025-02-01T09:24Z. https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server.
      • This is the source code for the server that Signal uses.
    2. “Signal (software)”. Wikipedia. Published: 2025-01-06T09:34Z. Accessed: 2025-02-1T09:30Z. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_(software).
      • ¶“Architecture”. ¶“Servers”.

        Signal relies on centralized servers that are maintained by Signal Messenger. In addition to routing Signal’s messages, the servers also facilitate the discovery of contacts who are also registered Signal users and the automatic exchange of users’ public keys. […]

    3. “Reflections: The ecosystem is moving”. moxie0. Signal Blog. Published: 2016-05-10. Accessed: 2025-02-01T09:40Z. https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/.
      1. ¶5. to ¶“Stuck in time”. ¶3-6

        One of the controversial things we did with Signal early on was to build it as an unfederated service. Nothing about any of the protocols we’ve developed requires centralization; it’s entirely possible to build a federated Signal Protocol-based messenger, but I no longer believe that it is possible to build a competitive federated messenger at all. […] [interoperable protocols] [have] taken us pretty far, but it’s undeniable that once you federate your protocol, it becomes very difficult to make changes. And right now, at the application level, things that stand still don’t fare very well in a world where the ecosystem is moving. […] Early on, I thought we’d federate Signal once its velocity had subsided. Now I realize that things will probably never slow down, and if anything the velocity of the entire landscape seems to be steadily increasing.

      2. ¶“Stuck in time”. “Federation and control”. ¶6.

        An open source infrastructure for a centralized network now provides almost the same level of control as federated protocols, without giving up the ability to adapt. If a centralized provider with an open source infrastructure ever makes horrible changes, those that disagree have the software they need to run their own alternative instead. It may not be as beautiful as federation, but at this point it seems that it will have to do.

      • Kalcifer@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        1·
        7 days ago

        My comment wasn’t protesting the use of Signal; it was rather clarifying the misinformation in OP’s post — ie misinformation that Signal is a federated service.

  • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    1·
    6 days ago

    Youtube is probably the one that you can’t “Just Switch To Fediverse”

    Youtube content is mainly by creators. If they won’t leave, there will be no transition. And unlike reddit posts, you can’t just reupload. Because they will copyright strike you and take it down. Also, videos take up a lot more space than just text and some low-res memes like reddit-type sites.

    reddit is essentially a bunch of strangers talking to people, moving froms stranger Group A to stranger Group B is very easy to do. The reddit > Lemmy transition is probably one of the easiest. You’re just joining a new group of strangers.

    For everything else, your contacts will also need to switch.

    For Mastodon, the people you follow will also need to switch. This is even harder than getting your friends to switch.

    • RandomVideos@programming.devEnglish
      1·
      6 days ago

      A lot of youtubers make a living posting videos.

      They dont have a good enough reason to risk going to a much smaller audience with no ads and no membership system

      They also probably arent knowledgeable enough about computers to switch

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      6 days ago

      Hear me out.

      Creators should be hosting peer tubes. And they should host exclusively their own content. Fans of their can subscribe to whatever systems they want to pay and support.

      For creators, it’s a backup for when YouTube the project inevitably fails. For fans as well. But it’s also a backup of their content.

      • Statick@programming.devEnglish
        1·
        6 days ago

        Tech-savvy content creators, sure…

        Your average content creator that wants to make Minecraft videos? Unrealistic.

        I hate the monopoly Youtube has, but all of the federated alternatives have a learning curve the general public isn’t willing to deal with.

        • Natanox@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
          1·
          6 days ago

          Not to mention it lacks any (ethical) monetization options. And the app is absolutely rudimentary, lacking even basic functionality.

          Framasoft made it clear they don’t want to make it a Youtube alternative though, however it could be through plugins. So there’d have to be a company or cooperative using it as a base to build upon, which is actually realistic. Especially European ones; not because Asia wouldn’t be interested in being more independent on the US as well, but because Framasoft is from France and Europe actively works towards this goal anyway with lots of money behind it.

  • Undaunted@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
    1·
    6 days ago

    Unfortunately, the switch from YouTube to PeerTube has not worked for me so far. I can’t find a decent instance (not full of right-wing/conspiracy content) with interesting stuff that also allows me to make an account.