Isn’t this the dilemma? Each type of fediverse project has its own focus, presenting posts in different ways. If we increase interoperability to the point where everything can be presented fully on any service, will each service be able to keep their focus? Would there be a point in having pixelfed when mastodon exists?
Mastodon is an app for sharing text that can also share pictures and videos. Pixelfed is an app for sharing pictures and videos with limited text.
You can curate a feed of pictures on Mastodon by following hashtags like #cats or #catstodon, but the interface is going to always emphasize the text first. Meanwhile on Pixelfed I can follow those same hashtags and get a much better experience for a feed primarily of pictures. Even though many/most of the posts will inevitably come from Mastodon users I can still browse those in my Pixelfed app in a much cleaner way. Artists can post their work from a Mastodon account, but the best way to view all their posts is going to be from Pixelfed.
This is why interoperability is a good thing. The whole point of federation is that different apps can implement their own version of the spec to curate a different type of user experience.
I don’t think it should be a dilemma - but some do. I don’t see why there can’t be different corners of the Fediverse. This is my most isolated account here and I’m fine with that. I don’t personally want or need integration with Mastodon. I’m glad mbin has that for people who do but I’m not interested in it. And I think it’s kind of cool that there are different cultures within Fedi. Mastodon, Pixelfed, and Lemmy are all so different from each other and I don’t think it’s a problem to solve.
I know the ActivityPub authors were concerned about Mastodon getting so big because it only implements a small portion of the AP spec. So they’re stoked that others are building out in ways that expand beyond the needs of microblogging.
Isn’t this the dilemma? Each type of fediverse project has its own focus, presenting posts in different ways. If we increase interoperability to the point where everything can be presented fully on any service, will each service be able to keep their focus? Would there be a point in having pixelfed when mastodon exists?
Mastodon is an app for sharing text that can also share pictures and videos. Pixelfed is an app for sharing pictures and videos with limited text.
You can curate a feed of pictures on Mastodon by following hashtags like #cats or #catstodon, but the interface is going to always emphasize the text first. Meanwhile on Pixelfed I can follow those same hashtags and get a much better experience for a feed primarily of pictures. Even though many/most of the posts will inevitably come from Mastodon users I can still browse those in my Pixelfed app in a much cleaner way. Artists can post their work from a Mastodon account, but the best way to view all their posts is going to be from Pixelfed.
This is why interoperability is a good thing. The whole point of federation is that different apps can implement their own version of the spec to curate a different type of user experience.
I don’t think it should be a dilemma - but some do. I don’t see why there can’t be different corners of the Fediverse. This is my most isolated account here and I’m fine with that. I don’t personally want or need integration with Mastodon. I’m glad mbin has that for people who do but I’m not interested in it. And I think it’s kind of cool that there are different cultures within Fedi. Mastodon, Pixelfed, and Lemmy are all so different from each other and I don’t think it’s a problem to solve.
I know the ActivityPub authors were concerned about Mastodon getting so big because it only implements a small portion of the AP spec. So they’re stoked that others are building out in ways that expand beyond the needs of microblogging.