lemillionsocks @ lemillionsocks @beehaw.org

Posts

9

Comments

332

Joined

2 yr. ago

Yeah there are a lot of little usability things that give mastodon a lot more friction to use compared to twitter. Sure a tech savvy person can figure it out and breeze through it but for an average user being forced to choose an instance, having to figure out how to find people on other servers that arent coming in, and using other websites to search and browser addons is a lot of work.

The site has gotten a lot more usable recently, but during the first few twitter exoduses Mastodon was very rough and it's no wonder that average users bounced off of it.

Thats not even getting into the network effect. Sure some people are there for the microblogs from anyone and building out the network effect. But twitter became mainstream with professionals. So for a lot of people the appeal of twitter was getting direct contact from celebrities and famous people, getting news from reporters as it was happening,Insight from industry professionals like writers, artists, and directors, and more! You could even get better customer service from companies because their twitter reps were more empowered to help you since your issue was more public.

Then there were the niche subjects that being big leads to. Wrestling mastodon is like 70% one guy on my timeline who is just really enthusiastic about womens wrestling(and posts news and cards for men's stuff too probably because he notices how little is out there). On twitter you have lots of people tweeting about it along with the actual wrestlers themselves!

The idea behind it per the video where they introduced it is that its a means of creators to take ownership of their own content. The idea being that if you follow creator X on youtube you arent actually following creator x you're following them on youtube. If something happens or youtube removes a video for whatever reason of they have to leave the platform then you lose access to their content.

If you're on this app you follow creator x on whatever platform they are on. So in theory it's not just an all in one app but a way to solve the youtube monopoly and make for an easy transition.

In concept I think it sounds really cool, but whether it actually is able to deliver on it's goals remains to be seen.

Lol yeah this is suffering from a lot of recency bias.

Its funny because tiktock has a landscape mode now and full controls. The thing theyre trying to copy has more rich controls but they stay on track with painfully limited media player. I use an extension on browser that just opens them in a normal player.

Hopefully this will curb that weird conspiracy theory right wing pipeline that the algorithm pushes people into, but I fear given how mature youtube is that the damage may have already been done.

Also I always love seeing them push short form content, when youtube used to have LOTs of shortform content but they adjusted the algorithm like 10 years ago to punish it. It screwed over a lot of the animators and comedy troupes that used to make up a lot of the site back then and ushered in the era of the video essay(as well as youtubers slowing down their speech and repeating themselves in order to get to minute 10).

The shorts dont bother me as much but the media player does. Like theres no playback controls, its portrait only, an it doesnt even let you fullscreen if youre on browser.

I started using freetube on my computer to play around with and while it's definitely still a work in progress in some senses, it does provide a neat experience.

Lol yes it's one of the largest websites on the internet. Hundreds of millions of unique users browse it a month and due to the fact that anyone can upload to it the site is LOADED with unique, insightful, creative, and informative content.

If you cant find good content on youtube it's probably more a you problem.

Understandably a few bucks for the hours of content I stream is justifiable, and if it were some other service I might, Im thinking on getting nebula, but google can go to hell. If they didnt want the burden of youtube they could have not bought it out, and not beat out the competition until they were the only game in town. Likewise Im salty that simple background and multitasking features are locked behind a paywall on a phone.

On top of that even the successful creators are kept afloat more by patreon and sponsor reads than they are youtubes ad services, and the algorithm and content blocker and lack of human support for creators means they regularly get screwed with age restrictions and copyright takedowns.

Im normally pretty understanding about companies needing to make a buck and be profitable and needing ads(though internet ads are non curated random scammy garbage) but I will continue to leech off of youtube until they finally block it.

To be fair depends on what you listen to on spotify. If you listen to major mainstream names, well yeah. Millionaires. If youre listening to smaller bands then the compensation model of spotify is shit and you can probably give them more direct compensation by going to a concert, buying some merch, and maybe directly buying music from them.

Weird I wonder if its a hardware thing caue I've had gestures on kde with wayland for years now and on x I could use touchegg to set them up

Proper HDR support and AMD to put in better HDMI 2.1 support on the open drivers.

KDE has multifinger gestures on wayland but present windows is 4 fingers down and present workspaces 4 fingers up. 3 finger gestures are to slide around workspaces. For whatever reason there is no way to customize this.

First person or shooter games I use mouse and keyboard for better control. I couch PC game so it's actually a wireless trackball and keyboard I use. For anything else it's controller.

This is something I hear but honestly I never fully left and it's about the same as it was before the leave. Maybe /r/all has gone downhill(as hard as that is to believe), but the default subs and /r/all were already pretty bad more than 10 years ago when I started curating my subs a bit more. If you subscribed wisely the only real change is that certain subs being dark for a while lead to other subs bubbling to the surface.

The niche community subs are still trucking along and the just off mainstream alternatives are still about where they were before the migration.

I know we want to believe that we were the heart and soul of the site, but lets be real here:

A)There are millions of people on that site. We arent special even among that sample size and not enough people left.

B)There just isnt enough engagement or comments on lemmy to prove this. I think in general a lot of the articles and content here is nice, it mirrors my rss reader more. But generally there isnt as much content or engagement. Some threads get more or less but a lot of my front page on lemmy has single digit comments.

I think there is potential to keep growing and being better, but that potential hasnt been reached yet, and Beehaw leaving will crush things since beehaw was not only a major hub, but the Be(e) nice philosophy did help temper some discussion from going towards typical online message board Nerd BS.

The issue is the way that news is consumed these days. You always used to have a catchy newspaper headline with a title to get you to buy it (extra extra read all about it insert catchy alliteration here) . People dont consume news. They dont read articles. They receive headlines and then immediately engage on some other website that profits off sharing this content.

Clickbate for all the woes exists because it works and people do click it. Or are more likely to click and share than if it was a dull informative headline. It's the same as on youtube. As long as the actual meat of the article is fine and the headline isnt too much of a BS article it doesnt bother me too much but of course there are limits to that.

I wonder if perhaps it's because it's a purely Disney product and theyre a little apprehensive of making an older skewing disney cartoon.

Ive seen plenty of people share news with me in the form of a tweet with an abbreviated link that goes to an actual source making me wonder why they didnt just send the source(probably because they didnt click the link or felt the abbreviation was helpful).

It's one of the huge issues the modern web faces. People dont spend time surfing from site to site like they used to , they mostly spend time scrolling a major social media platform(whether that be reddit, facebook, lemmy, twitter, mastodon, google news, etc) and scroll past shared headlines. Often not even clicking the link just scrolling past the headline.

Its one of the reasons many news sites are having a lot of trouble advertising and making money. It's why we have those controversial protectionist laws like in australia that are penalizing google news, and it's why web design of website home pages has gone down the toilet. Lots of websites are getting a more generic design on the grounds that most of their traffic doesnt come from someone going to "website.com" and seeing what's new they come from facebook mostly.

NPR is a little different because it isnt primarily a text based news source they are an audio one. Since theyre mostly radio programming they could keep focusing and producing their bread and butter and were able to transition gracefully into the podcast era. They rely on being in people's podcast feeds, or on peoples phones on an app more than they do being on x or facebook.

I feel like it's also a demo issue. I feel like there is a large overlap of people who listen to NPR and people who are like not going to follow Elon as he flushes twitter into the x toilet.

Gargoyles was made to go head to head with batman tas and they both did a great job of going right to the end of the line of what a tv-y7 could get away with(and probably couldnt get away with today). That said like Batman they both were designed to target kids and for all the brilliance there were episodes that skewed a little younger, and little touches like how shows of that era had to dance around words like "kill".

In addition to the usual stigmas surrounding animation I wonder if another factor in this is that it's a pure Disney branded product. While they have plenty of edgier stuff in their back catalog that should let people know their cartoons arent just for small children, the rep is there and they may not be ready to put out a tv-14 or even tv-pg cartoon that targets young adults and teens. It was find when its some licensed anime on d+, or if it's star wars or marvel, but this is a pure Disney badge.

Of course theres also the usual explanation of cost. Good animation costs a lot of money to produce and while lord knows disney has the cash it might be cheaper for them to just shoot this series in front of the giant tv. I feel like a show with characters like the gargoyales would be counter productive to be live action since they regularly fly, and would need expensive suits or full cgi anyway to work, but I suspect they do the math and no an effects guy is cheaper than a team of animators.

NPR is one of those big names in media with enough inertia that they can survive without just the usual social media bump a lot of other smaller sources rely on. Especially since theyre a big podcast giant at this point.

Hopefully its decent. Personally I would rather an animated reboot, but I imagine theyre going live action to target an older audience.

Lately Ive kind of taken a bit of an indifferent approach to the onslaught of remakes, sequels, and series coming back from cancellation years later. If it's good it's good and thats neat. If not meh, I dont have to watch or engage with it and hopefully it dies a quick death. I kinda wish that Hollywood would focus more on new and original ideas instead of their focus on sequels, IP, and reboots, but that's not going to change anytime soon.

At least Gargoyles has been off the air for about 30 years so it's not like theyre beating a dead horse here. If done well it could be interesting and would be very possible to provide a fresh take. That said it being live action doesnt leave me feeling optimistic.