We have a lot of options for all social media and other apps, but it is hard to catch people’s attention. How can we make more people use these platforms rather than a platform that p.dophiles run
Getting individuals to switch to something not commercial isn’t that hard, in my experience or opinion except in the case of instant messenger or other communication apps. The main point of contention with chat, or SM, is they are not there for the service. They are there because the people they know are there.
Unless you can get the majority of people switching at once, it’s gonna be really hard to get an individual, or even a handful to move.
Open source does not have billions of dollars to spend on marketing.
We can work together to polish apps/software and use word of mouth. This will help to grow these other options.
Explosive growth is driven by large dollar amounts. Think LinkedIn being included as a shortcut in Windows, or every phone coming with Facefuck pre installed.
Until we can get people away from platforms owned by major corporations we will not be able to shrug off the programs they push on people.
One answer: People love their defaults. Computers come pre installed with Windows, MacOS, (Bad) Android. Creative professionals are trained on Adobe Suite. Business professionals are trained and certified for MS Office and SaaS ERP Software. They don’t look beyond the defaults because their goal is not to determine which software/tool gives the most value or teaches them the most but which software/tool is the default that will give them a job and unfortunately FOSS is not the default for 90% of those people.
There are a few reasons, but I think this is the the most common. People accept almost anything if it means they can click one less button.
I’ve spent many hours reducing extremely complex things down to a couple simple steps, only to have people say it’s “too hard” because they need to copy-paste a single URL.
People have been made used to closed gardens. Some people can’t comprehend that open gardens and free choice exists.
Literally this. I usually hear some variation of “they are all evil so whatever” or “if its free, you are the product”
Like homie please dont fall for their lies
I’m going with “it’s not actually harder to promote decentralized options”. But they tend not to have marketing teams.
If one were to assemble an active professional marketing team for a decentralized tool, the team would be similarly effective as they would be for a centralized tool.
I agree, we need to promoting marketing decentralized/federated tools)
Its not as convinient, and you can’t blame anyone but yourself when it breaks.
(1) Network effects. People want to use social media that everyone else is using. Once a site achieves a critical mass of users it becomes the obvious choice to join. It also becomes difficult to leave because if you have built up a personal network on most sites, you can’t take it with you.
(2) Convenience. Most sites don’t require a lot of effort to use. In the past few years this one has surprised me a bit. The level of effort most people are willing to put in to trying a new site is basically 0. Using something like lemmy requires you to read a few paragraphs and make a decision about a home instance. That is too much effort for a lot of people.
Lemmy is a good example of non-obvious usage, even for seasoned redditors, let alone the general public. At first it presents familiar, but the nuances aren’t intuitive.
For convenience, it also doesn’t help that OSS is extremely hit and miss and inconsistent between developers.
This includes:
- App names
- UI/UX
- Features
- Quality of life
- Being a fucking dick to newcomers
At the end of the day, regular people want something that just works™. They don’t want to have to dig through
ancient tomesold form posts to figure out that a depreciated version of an app has been supersceeded by a slightly differently named version by a completely different dev that requires some weird dependencies that conflict with another app’s dependencies and everything just breaks at some point… It’s a pain in the ass.Social media networks without attention based algorithms also aren’t quite as addictive.
Using something like lemmy requires you to read a few paragraphs and make a decision about a home instance.
Hell, it isn’t even a major decision since moving instances is so easy now. Yes, it impacts the initial experience, but every social media app starts with a default experience and usage refines it from there.
Familiarity.
It was a pain in the ass for me to even try to get people I knew to even try Discord, if they weren’t already on it. They just love their Facebook too much to even take a moment to poke their head out and see the alternatives.
Because marketing department haven’t been open sourced yet
Microsoft, Apple, etc spend billions on marketing, whereas open source spends about 0. It relies wholly on word of mouth advertisements, and just showing people that it’s actually better and free
Believe you me, if tomorrow we get world wide advertising for a free operating system that works better than Window crap or apple crap, that won’t spy, and is free, a LOT more people will jump in.
I’m guessing that “open source” either is completely u known or still is a bit of a dirty word for people, associated with “alternative software” so it must be worse than the “real” software, right?
Even though in many MANY ways its superior to corporate software. And its free. And its almost always free as well.
I’m guessing that the cloud services has also been a response from tech companies to open source because on the one hand they get to use open source software for free without giving back anything and on the other hand they get to sell subscription services for stuff that should be free anyways.
Again, most SaaS software providers put there float on open source software, yet they’ll charge you through the nose for the little layer they built on top of that. There are other such layers available for free in the open source community,but you’ll have to set it up yourself. That is the basic difference.
For me, o host everything myself.
That means we can open source marketing. We can make people work for marketing open source apps, while they are unemployed. With the rise of unemployment, I think that makes sense
but why would they? and marketing is not cheap, you know. who will paid for them?
And you think the same questions don’t apply to developers?
Same thing there, buddy, yet here we are giving for free
They are already unemployed. They may get experience this way
Zero chance I’d ever do this. I wouldn’t even do it for payment.
Well, often they are just not as good and active. Most people care about content and service more than principles.
I’m on Lemmy due to principles but I am the kind of guy who will reject every single “legitimate interest” cookie consent, even if I have to click 300 times to do that… And even I went back to Reddit after my first encounter with Lemmy. The lack of content is a huge issue.
Decentralisation is an issue as well. Yes, it is here to solve problems, but it solves problems that big platforms face, but it creates a bunch of small problems that kill small platforms.
Most people don’t want to be forced to choose which one of the hundred providers they want to use, when they never heard about any of them, they have no idea what’s the difference and don’t care enough to learn… Shit, even I never cared to check what is the difference between Lemmy instances. And then you might have one community split between 10 instances… Each with one or two posts… And all long dead. Maybe one community with 10 times the user base could survive?
People always point to email as a decentralized system that works. They forget that originally nearly everyone got email through their ISP, and now nearly everyone gets their email through their OS vendor (Google, Apple, or Microsoft), or for businesses one of the few commercial mass mail services like mailchimp that don’t get blocked by spam filters. Self-hosting email is likely to result in a major hassle with undelivered emails due to anti-spam measures these days.
A lot of great comments, but another one that’s not mentioned: money and advertising
Open source / non profit run websites don’t have money to burn on mobile ads, and many wouldn’t want to put money into the ad industry even if they did.
It doesn’t guarantee users, plenty of startups fail after promotional campaigns, but it definitely helps people learn about the platform
This ☝️
but even more than ad, there is powerful marketing lock-in strategies: PCs come preinstalled with windows. Schools use and promote google stuff. Office is free and promted for university students, and same goes for Matlab and other scientific software
and same goes for Matlab and other scientific software
Eh, as someone who regularly works in Matlab it has some combinations of features that other single option provides
I’m reasonably confident that the reason has a lot to do with social proof. I don’t think it has much to do with UX, or amount of content, because both of those reasons would require people to actually try the fediverse to find out. In my experience, people don’t cite reasons as to why they won’t try a lesser-known platform, they enter a low-key fight-or-flight mode and sort of go blank, shut down, and don’t engage with the idea either way. It’s kind of spooky once you notice it in person.
To speculate, I think perhaps centralized, corporate services have an immediate advantage, because a brand name and a logo inherently provides a certain amount of social proof, since corporate brands and logos are so central to Western culture.
People who value things like open source are more likely to be curious people who enjoy understanding something
often such projects require active engagement and self education they also reward people look deeply into something
Look at things like Facebook everything is designed to lead you to an endpoint you are not ever allowed to understand how the machine works they reward people who shallowly engage often at a base less
It’s not mere complacency these platforms are designed for different people the people who enjoy one platform don’t typically enjoy the other because it’s not one specific thing about the product they enjoy or don’t enjoy it’s all the systems that form the big machine that they enjoy
I think that it would be easier for them to give up social media completely than to move somewhere else without people.
The only way would be to have something there that they need or want and then tell them to make an account in a specific place, no choosing instances bullshit, they’ll figure it out eventually if they’re interested.
Social media only matters if there’s people there. How can you convince someone of jumping ship to an empty place?
You’d think that would be a selling point these days
Well yeah for us antisocial freaks lmao
