Woha, edgy!
aasatru
joined 7 months ago
It might also be that they don't federate well - Bridgy was not built with Lemmy in mind, and Lemmy was not designed to be a very flexible application of ActivityPub.
It could also be that Lemmy can't search for users that are not already observed on the server, making Bridgy invisible as the account itself never posts any content anywhere.
As Bluesky is federated through it's own protocol (AT), ActivityPub content can be bridged to the AT protocol and appear on BlueSky. This is currently possible through Bridgy.fed.
If you want your stuff to be bridged to BlueSky, just follow @bsky.brid.gy@bsky.brid.gy. It probably doesn't work very well with the threadiverse though.
It doesn't work, as what is being shared here is not the post itself but a link to it. You cannot "re-post" other people's content into threads in the Threadiverse - they'd have to submit it themselves by tagging the community.
That said, people can check out @mho@social.heise.de and see if the post federated.
Yeah, having an option to suggest corrections to captions would probably be much more popular than actually writing them from scratch. I doubt it will be high on the list of priorities, but it would be a neat feature for sure.
Also true. There's a lot of enthusiasm in the Fediverse about writing alt texts, so who knows! It's a lot more work, but similar ballpark.
I guess it could, but implementing it in a decentralized system is probably more complicated at this point than having computer generated ones.
Discussing politics at Lemmy.ml was a mistake to begin with - they're doing us all a favour by nuking it. :)
I guess they would want some cybersecurity software like Crowdstrike in either case? If so, this could probably have happened on any system, as it's a bug in third party software that crashes the computer.
Not that I know much about this, but if this leads to a push towards Linux it would be if companies already wanted to make the switch, but were unwilling because they thought they needed Crowdstrike specifically. This might lead them to consider alternative cybersecurity software.
In terms of becoming a real competitor of YouTube, this is a huge step. Accessibility is a must.
Amazing news!
I think monetisation is more important on Peertube than other federated platforms I can think of.
We want people to post high quality videos on PeerTube. The production of high quality video content requires a lot of work and often also a decent chunk of money to produce. It's not like a toot or a post on Pixelfed, which is often not labour intensive at all. A photographer or an artist might very well showcase their work on Pixelfed, or an author their writing on Mastodon, but it would not compete with their business idea as people who are interested would still need to buy prints/high resolution versions/ebooks/subscriptions/whatever.
On PeerTube, it's very different. We want content creators to not only put money and time into creating quality content, but ideally we want them to host the content themselves in order to maintain full control over it. Without monetisation there's just no reason why they would be interested in doing that.
The question of how is of course much more difficult than the why.
Sponsorships is one obvious candidate. In theory this wouldn't require anything extra from Peertube - the producers of videos could easily add their own ads within the videos. However, sponsors are only interested in sponsoring content that has an audience, and the audience is on YouTube. Sponsored content is also potentially bad for obvious reasons.
Donations might make more sense, as they scale better to smaller but dedicated audiences. It is difficult to get people to cross the threshold for making them, but it's not exactly easy to make a profit on YouTube either. Donations good because they encourage quality, rather than ads which tend to favour views over substance.
So finally, traditional ads. We all hate them. They suck, and if they're incorporated they'll probably be blocked anyway. But I'm sure there's a case to be made in their favour - if it's implemented on the instance level, I certainly wouldn't be in a position to criticize. It could be necessary in order to host content on free instances, where people could build a following and then move on to self-hosting or join more restrictive ad-free instances should they get the opportunity to.
Personally I wouldn't be opposed to having a sort of virtual tip jar functionality. I could imagine myself paying $25 into a virtual wallet maintained by Liberapay, and to press a button underneath PeerTube videos to donate $1 to the creator whenever I found something was worthy of kudos. Maybe users with non-empty wallets could be rewarded with extra filters in Sepia search or something like that.
The best answer to why monetisation hasn't been figured out on PeerTube yet is, however, that it hasn't been figured out on the Internet in general. It's just really difficult, and every push towards monetisation tends to be the first step towards any service becoming completely shit. It's a really difficult problem. The Fediverse and PeerTube might solve some problems by being less dependant on monetisation in the first place, but that doesn't automatically make it an easy fix. More than anything we probably need an attitude change.
A good start would be to challenge the culture that makes monetisation so difficult, for example by making a donation to FramaSoft. Or simply make active use of the "support" button that already exists under many PeerTube videos. :)
I guess it's also natural that subcultures that tend to be banned elsewhere are early adaptors of alternative platforms.
We're lucky we didn't exist when the Trump extremists on Reddit went looking for a new home, or they would probably have been one of the biggest fields in this figure. Hopefully when the right wing extremists arrive instance admins will have the good sense to defederate.