this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2023
560 points (98.8% liked)

Lemmy.World Announcements

29079 readers
300 users here now

This Community is intended for posts about the Lemmy.world server by the admins.

Follow us for server news 🐘

Outages 🔥

https://status.lemmy.world

For support with issues at Lemmy.world, go to the Lemmy.world Support community.

Support e-mail

Any support requests are best sent to info@lemmy.world e-mail.

Report contact

Donations 💗

If you would like to make a donation to support the cost of running this platform, please do so at the following donation URLs.

If you can, please use / switch to Ko-Fi, it has the lowest fees for us

Ko-Fi (Donate)

Bunq (Donate)

Open Collective backers and sponsors

Patreon

Join the team

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] twoshoes@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I agree that the more accurate term is "board-proof" but I still think "CEO-proof" conveys the idea better to someone who is unaware of the way social media corpos work. The image of the shady CEO with his pinstripe suite and greased hair, lighting his big cigar with a wad of dollar bills is so strong in the cultural conciousness, that even my inlaws would switch to a federated plattform.

[–] TwystedKynd@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

My only concern is extremists making use of it to organize, spread misinformation, coordinate attacks, etc. and there's zero oversight. That's a serious concern that needs addressing, but I have no idea how.

[–] Spacemanspliff@midwest.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ban those communities from your instance. There's not going to ever be any way to prevent them starting their own, all you can do is defederate. There doesn't need to be any more.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nightscout@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I don’t think it’s necessary “CEO proof” but it is definitely a bit better positioned to avoid the pitfalls that Twitter and Reddit have experienced. Hence the reason I am here. But there’s nothing stopping a for-profit corporation from buying out the owner of a large instance (or multiple large instances). I think the best way to try and prevent that is for people to join hyper-local, hyper-specific instances that can all connect with one another. I assume that would be the benefit of Lemmy.

[–] JakeBacon@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

You can see a good example of this in the gaming sphere as both Path of Exile and Warframe have entire instances for themselves.

[–] ArtBear@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (5 children)

In the Fediverse there are no Zuckerbergs, Musks, Dorseys, Huffmans etc.

[–] hydra@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

There is ALWAYS the possibility to enshittify anything. Meta is trying to infiltrate Mastodon already.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Thedogspaw@midwest.social 1 points 1 year ago

There will never be a time when you need adds to pay for a server even if you had a server with 50 million people the cost to run that server might be like 100k if just 1 million people pay 1 dollar you already have 1 million dollars a month you only need adds when your a company that needs to grow every quarter

[–] anthoniix@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

One day the lemmy could just go closed source and sell to a company.

[–] damipereira@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Even if they do, they would not be able to force instance owners to update to the closed version. And people would take over the last available open source version and fork it. Also, a closed and open source version could co-exist, since the api is open.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›