Asklemmy

43866 readers

2221 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

How many users can Mastodon take per instance in a single day? (lemmy.dbzer0.com)

submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

12 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A lot of people has been questioning why so many go to BlueSky, and I think convenience and familiar look to Twitter in the official web UI and mobile app, not having to choose an instance by having one pre-selected (although can be changed) and I was wondering if Mastodon ever had such approach, would any instance be able to handle a huge traffic and mass migration to the instance? Or perhaps shuffle by checking instances health, but then would that even be worse instead?

For those who don't know, BlueSky is open-source, can be partially self-hosted and has API usage available free of charge, also can be bridged with the Fediverse. Which comes a long way better than Twitter and easier to reach from the Fediverse. However, it does have some questionable connections. Not possible to have investments and control them? Weird, for anyone who has heard of LadyBird (web browser) which takes a whole different approach when it comes to investment and still managed to get heavily funded.

Most of the people in the Fediverse who joined having privacy as a firat concern is well-aware and hear often privacy comes at the price of convenience, I doubt people who waited this long to leave Twitter (not even YouTube calls it X, only has the logo X) was because of privacy concern. But even if Mastodon were more convenient to those people in such way, would it even somehow be able to receive 100-150+ thousands people per day?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

Wow this question is all over the place. I want to call out the privacy bit though. The fediverse is NOT private. You are anonymous, and really pseudo anonymous. Everything you post here is shared with anyone listening though. There are guidelines for how to implement the protocol, but they are not rules. Things like deletes do not have to be honored. Any gov agency can spin up an instance and listen.

We can act like we're anonymous, but unless your hosting your own somewhere far off with no logs and zero way to trace it back to you, you're still open. Open web means open, it's what we want. The open web means no single entity can shut down the whole of the fediverse. The flip side is that you are also out there in the open.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

This is what keeps me from rolling my own instance for personal use. I would need to buy a domain (linked to me) to communicate with anyone else.

It would be nice to be able to spin up an instance on i2p or Tor without still needing access to the “normal” web, but I don’t think everyone’s going to hop onto pure i2p unless it comes built in to apps.

load more comments (4 replies)