[-] jadero@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 1 year ago

I agree. I have no idea what it takes to run publicly accessible services over the long haul. Hell, I can barely keep my sorry-ass website up!

I know that lemmy itself is pretty new, but I have to assume that the people who've been keeping SDF alive and functional for over 35 years know what they're doing.

[-] jadero@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago

Did you try logging in anyway? Maybe their email notification glitched. I've signed up a few places without providing an email, then come back a day or two later to find an active account.

[-] jadero@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 year ago

I mostly agree, but I've seen elsewhere that the fediverse (or some corners of it) were set up with the explicit intent to be ad-free and privacy respecting.

My opinion is that it all comes down to two things:

  1. Will Threads respect that intent?
  2. Given the difficulty of moderating content, can we handle the expected volume?

The answers to those questions can guide the admins (and us, I guess) in the decision.

[-] jadero@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Edit: this comment changed my mind. In a nutshell, if we can't keep a large instance controlled by "the enemy" from destroying what we've got, then we just have to do better next time.

Yes, I would. Even if they are administered by people that have the best interests everyone at heart, sheer size means that they must be taken into account as the tools and clients evolve over time.

It's not that the system itself should be unable to cope with large instances, it's that the only reason for the system itself to gain that capability is in response to the rise or introduction of large instances. Some of what I've seen discussed is the need to change the development roadmap to accommodate the seemingly unexpected rise and possible introduction of very large instances. In other words, those instances are already controlling the direction taken.

[-] jadero@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Edit: this comment changed my mind. In a nutshell, if we can't keep a large instance controlled by "the enemy" from destroying what we've got, then we just have to do better next time.

I have been making a related point that we should be concerned about any instance capturing too large a fraction of the space. I'm less concerned about the fact that it's Meta than I am about any one instance having a critical mass that gives them a controlling interest.

History has shown that those with a controlling interest eventually use that control for their own benefit.

That's why I joined a small collection of focused instances and try to subscribe to communities that are hosted in their "natural homes" instead of those on generic instances.

[-] jadero@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 year ago

If you'll accept early 20s as childhood (I do!) then me too! :)

58

Hello all! I'm tickled pink to have my application approved to join this instance. I suspect that the bar isn't all that high, but just let me have my fantasy.

I've been online since I figured out how to hook up a military surplus acoustic coupler modem to my VIC-20 way back when. Through all of my BBS, FidoNet, Usenet, a couple of different computer clubs (including one dedicated to UNIX!) and a career as a programmer, I somehow remained unaware of SDF.

If I believed in such things, I would say that the universe is telling me something, because I just retired and one of my objectives for this new phase of life is to restore my "all things computer" hobby that I left behind when I went pro.

It's summer here in Southern Saskatchewan, so that means fishing, swimming, hiking, camping, gardening, etc. When I switch to my winter activities, I'll start rummaging around on the SDF servers and see where it takes me.

jadero

joined 1 year ago