To scale up to a billion+ users of [whatever], it's easier if every user controls their own data (and some of 'nearby' users) on their own devices. Logically you'd need P2P between those billion+ users to make that network as a whole work.
BUT: figuring out how to do that well, is hard. Doing that in centralized manner (centralized database, users are clients only, etc) is easier. And gives maximum control to whoever starts it.
Of course scaling that means big hosting / bandwidth costs, to recoup (and profit!), enter advertising & all the bad incentives that come with it.
Like you, I hope the ad-supported everything crap is just a transitional stage, and by-the-people, for-the-people becomes the norm.
But P2P services done well is hard. The struggles of crypto coins, (truly) decentralized file sharing, and would-be FB competitors are just a few examples.
From reading the 'about' page I understood that this is a new social media platform in the Fediverse.
Now there is obviously one question: why should I participate in this and not in the existing projects like Mastodon? Why did you split up?
I suggest the Bonfire people should put the answer to that question on the top of the 'about' page.
Why using Bonfire? The first thing that comes up to me from the website is that this model of community-focused development seems more resilient to the wave of AI slop. A small Mastodon instance with 30-40 active people and limited federation would be useless. A Bonfire instance with the same people where you can work on community projects or scientific projects, sounds a lot more viable while keeping the shields up against the slop.
Profit hasn't been the goal of Silicon Valley for a very long time. Revenue and growth have been the goals, and chasing those two has been much more damaging than chasing profits.
To the point that Uber said they may never generate profit in their IPO filing
but I think there's a consensus around certain software not keeping its responsiveness acceleration on par with hardware capability acceleration, some of it driven by ideas like "everyone phone now has 8gb of ram, c'mon", but most of it by profit incentives on the other side, e.g. cloud providers.
I was really happy to discover proxmox (my micro-homelab is a dell mini pc, a mid-range asus gaming router, a 2-slot synology nas, and it's rocking)
then, hetzner (for workloads that cannot be hosted on my homelab), they have an outstanding performance for 3-5$ monthly. before that I used aws lightsail, digital ocean droplets, and before that I used google cloud. I basically started with the worst and ended up with the best, I'm quite sad about that as I've wasted so many hours learning the stupid GCP ui, which was buggy and convoluted af. basically I went on one of the worst paths in terms of devops/sysadmin leverage, wasting time on semi-non-transferrable skills. this was not my main job, though, it was mostly hobby projects but still
it definitely helps to have scars, though. just pray something/someone takes you out of the pain soon enough (it took me ~4y to finally realize there has to be a better way at least for small/medium projects)
- The homepage has a bunch of "Bonfire is...", but they don't tell me much about how Bonfire achieves any of those goals like to be a "commons".
- There's a codebase and documentation, but it comes in six different "flavours", although I can only really differentiate between two.
- Most of the FAQs just say "wip".
- It proudly states that there are no ads, no tracking, etc, but doesn't tell me what there are no ads on, or what isn't tracking me.
- It proudly states that it's federated, but as far as what it federates with, that's "wip".
I'm all for more federation, more data control, and experiments in social networking, but I'm a technical user and I have no idea what this is or does. It feels like in service of wanting to be as abstract and flexible, it maybe just doesn't solve any actual concrete problems.
If it's a toolkit with which to build social networks, that's great, but much of the documentation suggests that it's also a network itself, suggesting perhaps limited use as a toolkit. If it supports ActivityPub or AtProto, it really needs to come out and say that up front. "Bonfire is a framework for building custom AtProto based social networking applications" would be a great summary, or "Bonfire is a Mastodon alternative exploring the frontier of ActivityPub federated applications" would be great too.
https://docs.bonfirenetworks.org/readme.html
Further down the page it says it is built in Elixir with Phoenix/LiveView and PostgreSQL.
It is something about community, the sense of belonging, glorified bureaucracy, being slow, and good writing. A Kinfolk of software.
Relevant meme: "I took LSD last night and had this vision of a federated social network that will disrupt the world. Will you help bring it to fruition? I can't offer any money right now"
I think it's like when they were saying "blockchain is a technology and bitcoin it's its first application" kind of thing.
I think before we talk about being only paid once for software (which isn't a finished product like a brick anyway) we need to figure that out.
I guess I would like to see someone make the Once model work to great success. I don't know how you would deal with updates and stuff, but that's what I meant. One "simple" solution is just charging the LTV (or something that's close to it) as the one-time price.
The benefit of doing it this way was that the user had a choice in upgrading which aligned incentives between users and developers. The developer had to deliver tangible improvements in order to keep payments from existing users coming. These days they change the color scheme every six months, remove features, change the UI for no dicernable reason and label the whole changelog "Various changes and bug fixes" when the product is clearly a mature product that should be in maintenance mode with no significant changes required.
Go to Main Page
Scroll down to go to the "Code of Conduct"
Search on "Reverse"
Read
"Our community prioritises marginalised people’s safety over privileged people’s comfort. Moderators reserve the right not to act on complaints regarding:
‘Reverse’ -isms, including ‘reverse racism,’ ‘reverse sexism,’ and ‘cisphobia.’ or critiques of racist, sexist, cissexist, or otherwise oppressive behaviors or assumptions."
Ask yourself if you want to be a part of a community of people that condones certain racism and sexism.
For example discrimination based on race is racism, objectively. Creating a reverse-ism out of that subjectively singles out a particular identity to champion. An effective code of conduct would not mention such subjectivity in any form.
> is a far-left political and militant group that controls a substantial amount of territory in Chiapas, the southernmost state of Mexico.[4][5][6][7]
I don't mean to preach political theory now, but as far as I can see we're already collectively pretty divided (divide and conquer comes to mind): for a project that seems to preach all manner of fairness and correction of a system gone wrong, and is arguably moderately anti-capitalist (in the sense of objecting some of the status-quo product of Silicon Valley's mode of operation), do we really need to be thrown all the way to the other end of the left-right scale? Is Bonfire arguing for the analogue of "militant revolution" of software?
Imagining the project now, I am envisioning green-clad militants writing "fair" software. While not without merit, in my opinion the explicit political associations detract from the intrinsic value something like Bonfire could have for us, who are indeed have never been more firmly under the boot of the commercial IT industry than now.
In Latin America, there are many communities that have suffered because of specific capitalist ventures: a banana plantation, a copper mine, etc.
You have to acknowledge these things and offer a better version of capitalism if you want diminish this divide.
People are funny.
Im going to assume you're a reasonable person and have been watching some news. You probably think like I do that its good for society to follow some laws and have some checks on different groups power.
Hows that working out right now? You know without meaningful militancy on one side of the political spectrum.
Xiol32•4h ago
RadiozRadioz•3h ago
aloisdg•2h ago
chobeat•1h ago
chrz•3h ago