your prefered opensouce alternative to facebook?
 

hello

i use a bit mastodon to filter a bit requsets from others people on several ineternet plateforms (reddit, forums..) eg i just let a mastodon instead of email or xmpp

well, i was thinking :

to just share contents between people, by not using facebook (nor mastodon), would you prefer :

friendica?
diaspora?
movim?
hubzilla?
mobilizon?
or others?

in which type of context?

thank you for your feedbacks :)

My favorite? Just real life, meet people face to face. The heck with hiding behind avatars and servers and such. Meet people for real!

Then again I am an old guy almost 70.... still real life works best

I've never wasted my time with "social media." However, over these many years, I have productively wasted my time in creating over 30,000 posts on "conventional forums" like this one.

To me, "forums" like this one have a definite taxonomy, and a specific focus. You have come here to ask a "Linux question," and you probably need the right answer very urgently. Which, if I can, I will try my best to give. Or maybe you're just hanging around the water cooler, but once again you're replying to a thread. Traditional "social media" does not have any of that.

I prefer something that decentralized that allows global communications and is not a commercial enterprise. Fido-net comes to mind (and yes, I still use a connected BBS or two). The closest current thing is The Fediverse, which INCLUDES but is NOT limited to Mastodon.

If COVID were not still killing over 1000 people per week I would agree with jkirchner, meeting people for REAL beats virtual! I mean, by a LOT!

I frankly have lost any interest I used to have in participating in "social" media platforms.

I think that, thanks to bots, trolls, uncredentialed "influencers" spouting off about subjects about which they know little or nothing or often less than nothing, and outright liars, it has become a--er--less than positive force.

And that was before Elon Mu--oh, never mind.

I frequent some forums, such as here, & only converse with specific groups on FB.

I have no interest what so ever in idle chat with strangers online, (nor these so called 'influencers' people talk about - I always find info & make up my own mind about things!).

On forums, and yes, still on Usenet newsgroups, I can interact in a subject-focused way with people who want – and need – "help." I'm not stuck standing next to a water cooler listening to someone "bloviate." There are many sub-forums on this site and I do not visit most of them, unless a particular title catches my eye.

In like manner, I have from time to time posted a question of my own – and promptly received high-quality responses from other people who know.

I simply don't have the time to wander through other sites which have no such taxonomy. For example, I do not frequent "StackExchange," nor any of its other commercial spin-offs. Even though they obviously attract thousands of revenue-producing visits per day, they are not an efficient way to get reliable answers.

Yes, it is more or less hopeless. Social media is a write-only platform, everyone posts something very important that no one cares about and no one will remember tomorrow.
As it was already explained I prefer "targeted" communication where we have something to discuss and/or resolve rather than simply promoting our egos.
But anyway, if you really want to share something open a blog somewhere and publish.
(oh yes, it does not depend on the software you use - just to answer your question).

No 'social media' here other than a few 'forums'. This format works great for exchanging information that is specific to my interests. Otherwise prefer face to face. Sit down over a table, etc.

I'm only on LQ. :)

What criteria do we have for evaluating social media platforms?

I believe "public trust" to be an important indicator of the health of a society or area of society: am I comfortable allowing my children to run free in the park? Is my wife safe walking around after dark? Can I trust that the fruit at the local grocer hasn't been posoined by some random shopper? I prefer society in which fear hasn't seeped into the hood to the point of impairment... So I kind of see this as an indicator: the public trust versus pubic paranoia.

So I apply this to social media: does the platform make my public trust feel more secure? Like getting feedback on the local winter road conditions; finding lost animals; and many other public benefits of social media. But what if I am being targeted by behavior tracking avertisments, and every thought or joke I share becomes data owned by the platform? The idea that social media is listening increases the other side of that criteria: public paranoia goes up: my device is spying on me; friend requests are from catfish and scammers.

So is the benefit of having the local road conditions and puppy finding service worth such a tradeoff of increased paranoia and loss of dignity (surely you own your own face once you post it right?) And I would say the answer is no. Public trust is important; it reduces stress levels living where living is safe.

Of course, there are other social media platforms that can still reunite you with your lost pet, as well as update you on local conditions, without the indentured servitude. And so I think it is right to speak up about them so they don't get lumped into the same label of social media in general.

One last form of social distrust in a platform, is that it will lose some kind of platform software race, and everybody will switch to some other platform, and so why put all that energy into something new, that you might have to undo later?

Don't some of the platforms distribute advertising revenues among its members? And there are some, like steem, with block chain transactions and currency, such that members earn crypto for publishing content. So the public trust factor is higher with these platforms that distribute the benefits an online social community collectively creates, and so are worthy of consideration: should I adopt this new platform that gives me returns on my interest? And I think the biggest obstruction to adoptation is the fear of supporting a failing platform; at least with the federation, there is a standard activity pub protocol, so you can hop around compatible platforms;

I understand not wanting to be spied upon... but the other objection is just resignation to not trying new stuff; that resignation I challenge. Make steem accounts... try the other ones... this social chemistry is still emerging... we have to stay emersed in it to keep it safe...

Social Media... Avoiding it is not because I don't want to be spied upon or am overly paranoid. It simply isn't needed. A waste of my time. These forums is as 'close' to social media that one needs to get (and still spend to much time I suspect). Ask a question, get an answer. Sharing a computer project like on hack-a-day. Social to me means interacting with your fellow man face to face across the table, or a club meeting, or spending time at the flying field, or visiting mom and dad at home, talking over the fence with your neighbor, Easter dinner... well you get the picture. Or even calling someone up on the phone and spending some time that way. It is certainly NOT over the internet -- you, the computer, and the internet. Nope notta. That is really 'anti-social' behavior in my mind.

With the fediverse I can, should I choose, run my own server.

Strangely enough, I trust me.

I should know better. ;-)

Usenet and Mailing lists. Some. Sometimes.

Zuck is on the 'fediverse' with 'threads.'
"zuck
1w
First post in the fediverse! ��
1,796
replies
·
zuck
1w
We're making progress integrating Threads into the fediverse and launching a beta in a few countries that lets people choose to federate their posts. If you see this and turn it on from your profile, you'll see likes from federated platforms appear on your posts here."
https://www.threads.net/@zuck

I agree with this sentiment. There are observable antisocial tendencies. It is often more difficult these days to strike up a conversation in places, like airports, where fellow travelors used to share travel tales, because today all the fellow travelors are staring at their antisocial media.
On the other hand, travel is not without impact, and there are so many folks on this planet who I wish I could meet face to face, but just can't travel everywhere to do it. There are those with whom I have met, but we reside too far apart to see regularly, including family. The appeal of the social media applications is the streamling of the tools for interacting with these far away friends and family. We could just call and send letters and postcards; but the convenience of sharing files, pics, vids, media, money, and videocalls,all with the same app has that appeal of ease. But nothing's free, and if these tools come at the price of privacy invasion, then they shouldn't be backed. Are there any emerging that are more respectful? I don't want to categorically reject all social media platforms as invasive and anti-social, without giving each due consideration. Clearly, LQ ranks pretty highly in my book as well.

The next generations growing up with social media apps are already way different. Caution is advisable. I wouldn't want locally present socializing to get replaced with locally virtual socializing: when we are right next door, we should tell each other on a walk, instead of texting through the walls. Getting their sense of self esteem through likes and hearts, fishing for feedback... it is changing the public psyche in a different way, that may be lowering the trust overall by creating armies of screen following fart fearing introverts.

I think @wpeckham is right as far as the fediverse beign comprised of individuals running their own servers being able to trust themselves... I experimented with a pleroma box, and like everything else, it did require some considerable configuration... I like that it can be used unfederated, just amongst a private group of friends. But trying to federate exposed the no-longer private group to content of other servers that may not be tasteful, so there was a great deal of whitelisting involved.

I can compare the influence of anti-social networks on my environment and include the part of my environment that is not exposed to them, then empirically claim that they contribute to the rotting of society.

Although I have not yet been asked to develop a theory around my observations, I came to conclusions (believes, convictions, call them obsessions if you want) and do not want to have anything to do with these services.

"Conventional forums," like this one, have a taxonomy – a structure of sections and subsections to channel the various conversations that are taking place, and moderators who can and do move them around so that they get proper exposure. They also have a very good "search" feature, and, by now, an enormous archive.

There is another group of technical forums – run by the "StackExchange" companies – which do not have any such taxonomy. (Also, it is entirely possible there to "get voted off the island." Your post must be "popular.") However, they are obviously extremely good at "attracting eyeballs," so any post that you make there is going to disappear into the oblivion within about ten minutes. Certainly, these forums are frequented by people who are extremely knowledgeable, and I have no objections at all to "the human communities there." But I find the [lack of ...] organization/taxonomy of the site(s) to be unworkable and rarely frequent them. It simply takes too long to "find the answer that you are looking for." (And, if your post is not "immediately seen" by someone who is "on the site now," it very likely will not be seen at all. It's simply a "spew of posts.")

So, I suppose the bottom line is: "LQ ... you're [still ...] doin' somethin' right." :)