Facebook, Twitter, Google+, & Mastodon

[DinoToyForum]

Sounds good. Are you or Blaine going to be posting the ATB reviews?

I will. I don't think Blaine is on Facebook. @Jetoar and @brontodocus both have access to post on the ATF Facebook page but neither of them are active on the AFT any more, let alone the FB page!

[DinoToyForum]

Since I've gone back to posting links to new ATB and MTB reviews on the 'Toy Blogs' Facebook page, I've remembered how awful Facebook has become as a platform.

@suspsy, it used to be that when you posted a link, it picked the first image of the post, or you could select an image from the post. Now, it seems to do this 50% of the time (why not 100!?) so you can sometimes see a preview of the image when composing the post, but when you actually post the link the image always disappears anyway, to be replaced by a cropped image of the blog banner (or no image at all). I can't see a way to select the linked image, like there used to be. Is there a way?

I realise a solution is to upload an image manually but there are several reasons why I don't want to do this, not least because it's a time consuming faff, but mainly because I don't fancy giving FB copyright to a large proportion of our photographs to do with as they please (e.g. train their AI).

The FB posts generate little traffic anyway, which is my one and only reason for doing it. FB is constantly trying to convince me to spend money to boost the posts to my followers - without boosting, the system is essentially broken for the purposes of both the page owner and the followers, who often miss out on seeing the posts they subscribed to see. Also, sometimes people comment on the FB post instead of on the blogs themselves, which bugs me no end, it feels as if I'm generating content for FB and creating competition for the blogs and forums.

If it was a simple matter of copy-pasting a link, and if the links appeared in everyone's feed, I'd keep doing it. I'll do that for a little while and see how it goes. But if they get no clicks I don't think I'm going to continue as things stand. A huge part of me just wants to pull the plug on the whole Facebook page completely, almost as a matter of principle at this point.

Achieving the equivalent on Mastodon takes no effort at all - it literally takes care of itself, as all blog posts are simply mirrored automatically onto the Fediverse with an excerpt, image, and link to the full post on the blog. And comments there are even mirrored as comments on the blogs. Knowing how simple it could and should be makes the inefficient antiquated Facebook system all the more frustrating to use.

[SBell]

Is there a Bluesky account? That site has been picking up.

And just realized that Google+ has been dead so long I was confused to see the reference!

[DinoToyForum]

Is there a Bluesky account? That site has been picking up.

And just realized that Google+ has been dead so long I was confused to see the reference!

I will never go to BlueSky or Threads, either personally or professionally (e.g. as the blogs), because I'm done with giant centralised social media platforms. We've been down that path enough times to know where it leads. Let Google+ be a lesson to us all! And Twitter, who remembers that? I'm all in on the decentralised social web instead, including Mastodon, which runs on a different model. And specialist forums like this one, run by people who actually care. I'm only sticking with Facebook - barely - because of the legacy and existing audience there.

I don't want to see BlueSky picking up and help contribute to that, I want to see the DinoToyBlog and Forum picking up!

[SBell]

Is there a Bluesky account? That site has been picking up.

And just realized that Google+ has been dead so long I was confused to see the reference!

I will never go to BlueSky or Threads, either personally or professionally (e.g. as the blogs), because I'm done with giant centralised social media platforms. We've been down that path enough times to know where it leads. Let Google+ be a lesson to us all! And Twitter, who remembers that? I'm all in on the decentralised social web instead, including Mastodon, which runs on a different model. And specialist forums like this one, run by people who actually care. I'm only sticking with Facebook - barely - because of the legacy and existing audience there.

I don't want to see BlueSky picking up and help contribute to that, I want to see the DinoToyBlog and Forum picking up!

It's just so hard these days, getting search engines to drive traffic is ruined by AI and paid traffic, and social media is based on algorithms that can't be trusted either...

[stargatedalek]

As someone who has hated Twitter long before Enron Muskrat took it over, and never truly adopted facebook (aside from minimal mandated usage); I actually do want to see BlueSky continue to gain steam. It's algorithm and policies are a lot more ethical (doesn't defocus external links, bans AI scraping, etc.).

[DinoToyForum]

As someone who has hated Twitter long before Enron Muskrat took it over, and never truly adopted facebook (aside from minimal mandated usage); I actually do want to see BlueSky continue to gain steam. It's algorithm and policies are a lot more ethical (doesn't defocus external links, bans AI scraping, etc.).

Until they aren't. Multi-million backed start-ups like this are able to tempt people in by offering a good service at first - but only because it is unsustainable. Once enough people are locked in, the focus shifts from users to shareholders. And you can guess what happens then, because it has happened again and again.

A centralised platform can also be bought and sold at any time, and changed at the new owner's whim. Look at what happened to Twitter. Exactly the same could happen to BlueSky if it becomes successful... and why wouldn't it?

I can say I'll never sell out the DTF and I mean it. But if Elon Musk offered me a billion for it, well, I'm sure you wouldn't blame me for considering it.

[SBell]

As someone who has hated Twitter long before Enron Muskrat took it over, and never truly adopted facebook (aside from minimal mandated usage); I actually do want to see BlueSky continue to gain steam. It's algorithm and policies are a lot more ethical (doesn't defocus external links, bans AI scraping, etc.).

Until they aren't. Multi-million backed start-ups like this are able to tempt people in by offering a good service at first - but only because it is unsustainable. Once enough people are locked in, the focus shifts from users to shareholders. And you can guess what happens then, because it has happened again and again.

A centralised platform can also be bought and sold at any time, and changed at the new owner's whim. Look at what happened to Twitter. Exactly the same could happen to BlueSky if it becomes successful... and why wouldn't it?

I can say I'll never sell out the DTF and I mean it. But if Elon Musk offered me a billion for it, well, I'm sure you wouldn't blame me for considering it.

Honestly, for that much, not a person here would blame you!

[DinoToyForum]

As someone who has hated Twitter long before Enron Muskrat took it over, and never truly adopted facebook (aside from minimal mandated usage); I actually do want to see BlueSky continue to gain steam. It's algorithm and policies are a lot more ethical (doesn't defocus external links, bans AI scraping, etc.).

Until they aren't. Multi-million backed start-ups like this are able to tempt people in by offering a good service at first - but only because it is unsustainable. Once enough people are locked in, the focus shifts from users to shareholders. And you can guess what happens then, because it has happened again and again.

A centralised platform can also be bought and sold at any time, and changed at the new owner's whim. Look at what happened to Twitter. Exactly the same could happen to BlueSky if it becomes successful... and why wouldn't it?

I can say I'll never sell out the DTF and I mean it. But if Elon Musk offered me a billion for it, well, I'm sure you wouldn't blame me for considering it.

Honestly, for that much, not a person here would blame you!

Don't worry, for that much, I could give every single DinoToyForum member a parting thank-you gift of $100,000, staff and former staff a cool million, and I'd still have 700 million left over. So, we'd all be winners.

[stargatedalek]

As someone who has hated Twitter long before Enron Muskrat took it over, and never truly adopted facebook (aside from minimal mandated usage); I actually do want to see BlueSky continue to gain steam. It's algorithm and policies are a lot more ethical (doesn't defocus external links, bans AI scraping, etc.).

Until they aren't. Multi-million backed start-ups like this are able to tempt people in by offering a good service at first - but only because it is unsustainable. Once enough people are locked in, the focus shifts from users to shareholders. And you can guess what happens then, because it has happened again and again.

A centralised platform can also be bought and sold at any time, and changed at the new owner's whim. Look at what happened to Twitter. Exactly the same could happen to BlueSky if it becomes successful... and why wouldn't it?

It's plenty sustainable, the problem is that billionaire's don't want sustainable, they want infinite growth. Twitter was stable like that for almost a decade before it started truly sliding. If they become less ethically run in the future or get bought out etc. I'll just jump ship when it's relevant, for now I'm happy a more ethical alternative exists and I'm very glad to see it gaining traction exactly for that reason.

There is no need to downplay what is objectively a good thing just because it probably won't last forever, after all nothing lasts forever. And it's not like Mastodon is immune to these and other problems. Even though it's servers are decentralized it's IP is not, and could still be sold to corporate interests or otherwise monopolized. Plus it's decentralized nature makes moderation more difficult.

[Shane]

As someone who has hated Twitter long before Enron Muskrat took it over, and never truly adopted facebook (aside from minimal mandated usage); I actually do want to see BlueSky continue to gain steam. It's algorithm and policies are a lot more ethical (doesn't defocus external links, bans AI scraping, etc.).

Until they aren't. Multi-million backed start-ups like this are able to tempt people in by offering a good service at first - but only because it is unsustainable. Once enough people are locked in, the focus shifts from users to shareholders. And you can guess what happens then, because it has happened again and again.

A centralised platform can also be bought and sold at any time, and changed at the new owner's whim. Look at what happened to Twitter. Exactly the same could happen to BlueSky if it becomes successful... and why wouldn't it?

It's plenty sustainable, the problem is that billionaire's don't want sustainable, they want infinite growth. Twitter was stable like that for almost a decade before it started truly sliding. If they become less ethically run in the future or get bought out etc. I'll just jump ship when it's relevant, for now I'm happy a more ethical alternative exists and I'm very glad to see it gaining traction exactly for that reason.

There is no need to downplay what is objectively a good thing just because it probably won't last forever, after all nothing lasts forever. And it's not like Mastodon is immune to these and other problems. Even though it's servers are decentralized it's IP is not, and could still be sold to corporate interests or otherwise monopolized. Plus it's decentralized nature makes moderation more difficult.

I tend to agree, there's a wide gulf between "infinite growth" and "sustainable". And yeah, nothing lasts forever, but it doesn't mean one can't enjoy Bluesky while it's still pre-"encrappification".

[DinoToyForum]

As someone who has hated Twitter long before Enron Muskrat took it over, and never truly adopted facebook (aside from minimal mandated usage); I actually do want to see BlueSky continue to gain steam. It's algorithm and policies are a lot more ethical (doesn't defocus external links, bans AI scraping, etc.).

Until they aren't. Multi-million backed start-ups like this are able to tempt people in by offering a good service at first - but only because it is unsustainable. Once enough people are locked in, the focus shifts from users to shareholders. And you can guess what happens then, because it has happened again and again.

A centralised platform can also be bought and sold at any time, and changed at the new owner's whim. Look at what happened to Twitter. Exactly the same could happen to BlueSky if it becomes successful... and why wouldn't it?

It's plenty sustainable, the problem is that billionaire's don't want sustainable, they want infinite growth. Twitter was stable like that for almost a decade before it started truly sliding. If they become less ethically run in the future or get bought out etc. I'll just jump ship when it's relevant, for now I'm happy a more ethical alternative exists and I'm very glad to see it gaining traction exactly for that reason.

In principle, a social media platform can be sustainable, like the DTF for example. But we aren't talking about principle, we're talking about reality, and BlueSky is absolutely not sustainable in its current form and setup. It's running at a loss now, payed for by its donors, who are betting it can recoup - and then some - later.

As someone who has hated Twitter long before Enron Muskrat took it over, and never truly adopted facebook (aside from minimal mandated usage); I actually do want to see BlueSky continue to gain steam. It's algorithm and policies are a lot more ethical (doesn't defocus external links, bans AI scraping, etc.).

Until they aren't. Multi-million backed start-ups like this are able to tempt people in by offering a good service at first - but only because it is unsustainable. Once enough people are locked in, the focus shifts from users to shareholders. And you can guess what happens then, because it has happened again and again.

A centralised platform can also be bought and sold at any time, and changed at the new owner's whim. Look at what happened to Twitter. Exactly the same could happen to BlueSky if it becomes successful... and why wouldn't it?

There is no need to downplay what is objectively a good thing just because it probably won't last forever, after all nothing lasts forever. And it's not like Mastodon is immune to these and other problems. Even though it's servers are decentralized it's IP is not, and could still be sold to corporate interests or otherwise monopolized. Plus it's decentralized nature makes moderation more difficult.

Mastodon and the rest of the interconnected Fediverse, including the Dinosaur Toy Blog, run on the ActivityPub protocol. This protocol is immune, as far as any protocol can be, in the same way the Email Protocol or Internet Protocol is immune. I mean, I don't think even Elon Musk could buy email or the internet, right?

Its decentralised nature makes moderation more easy, because each server on the Fediverse is moderated by an actual small team, or an individual for tiny servers, who care about their community, in the same way I and the moderator team here care about the DTF. The moderator on my server cares - it's paleoartist John Conway. Entire 'bad' servers can be blocked by the moderators if they so choose, or you can block them yourself - you are in full control. And if the user is not happy with the server they are on, or unhapppy with their moderators, they can migrate their account to a different server - that functionality is built in to give users choice. If they are really serious, they could set up their own server if they want full control. And, if the user simply doesn't like Mastodon, they can move to a different part of the Fediverse, say Lemmy or Pixelfed or dozens of others, from where you can still follow people on Mastodon anyway. Because they all run on the same protocol.

Think of a Fediverse account like an email account, but public instead of private.

You don't go to email.com to register an email. You pick a server, like Hotmail. Don't like Hotmail? Move to Gmail. Don't like Gmail, want full control of your own server instead, set up your own email address at stargatedarlek.com. All email servers - hotmail.com, gmail.com, stargatedarlek.com if you set one up - can all talk to each other using the same email protocol anyway. This is exactly how ActivityPub works for the social web. This means it can become essentially permanent in the same way email is essentially permanent.

Would you use an email provider that only allowed you to exchange emails with other people using the same provider? Say, a gmail account that could only email other gmail accounts? Because that's exactly what centralised social media platforms are like, and it makes no sense in a world where that doesn't have to be the case. I struggle to understand how anyone could argue for it, or choose that over an open alternative.

If we're talking ethics and permanency, Mastodon and the Fediverse is the obvious choice. You mentioned the BlueSky Algorithm being more ethical than others. Well, Mastodon doesn't have an algorithm. You can't get more ethical than that, you simply see the posts of the people you follow, imagine that!

Did you not get on with Mastodon when you tried it? If you're willing to give it another try, follow me and the D/A/MTB on there if you haven't already. It just takes a little bit of getting used to because we've done social media so badly for so long. For me, the Fediverse is what the social internet should be, and I'm confident it - or some incarnation of it - will become the standard sooner or later. It would just be good if we didn't have to take a detour to a doomed BluesSky on the way.\

Edited to add: the Mastodon server I'm on is https://sauropods.win and my personal account is @[email protected]
The DTB etc are on their own server(s) so you can follow them from any Fediverse platform (including Mastodon) by searching for the following respectively:
@[email protected]
@[email protected]
@[email protected]

[BlueKrono]

I am learning a lot not about dinosaur toys, and I am not complaining.

[DinoToyForum]

I am learning a lot not about dinosaur toys, and I am not complaining.

At least it's not politics!

[DinoToyForum]

Is there a Bluesky account? That site has been picking up.

And just realized that Google+ has been dead so long I was confused to see the reference!

I will never go to BlueSky or Threads, either personally or professionally (e.g. as the blogs), because I'm done with giant centralised social media platforms. We've been down that path enough times to know where it leads. Let Google+ be a lesson to us all! And Twitter, who remembers that? I'm all in on the decentralised social web instead, including Mastodon, which runs on a different model. And specialist forums like this one, run by people who actually care. I'm only sticking with Facebook - barely - because of the legacy and existing audience there.

I don't want to see BlueSky picking up and help contribute to that, I want to see the DinoToyBlog and Forum picking up!

It's just so hard these days, getting search engines to drive traffic is ruined by AI and paid traffic, and social media is based on algorithms that can't be trusted either...

The Fediverse is the answer to this as well!

[BlueKrono]

I am learning a lot not about dinosaur toys, and I am not complaining.

At least it's not politics!