Discord unveils Discord Orbs, a new in-app currency that users can earn by completing Quests, which reward participants who interact with ads
Technology
137
Beiträge
83
Kommentatoren
5
Aufrufe
-
It is open source. But from what I can tell the accounts are largely still hosted centrally, and it isnt federated in any way, which isn't great. Anybody can host an instance or server.
So ultimately it looks like a massive step up from Discord, with some small issues here and there.
documentation/docs/faq/instances.md at master · revoltchat/documentation
Moved to https://github.com/revoltchat/wiki. Contribute to revoltchat/documentation development by creating an account on GitHub.
GitHub (github.com)
Oh well. Matrix it is, then.
(I prefer XMPP but no group chats kinda ruins it if it's a feature you expect)
-
something that won’t fall into the same pitfal
What exists that cannot be sold to a high enough bidder? Even Lemmy isn't magically immune. If the admins of .world got handed checks for a couple million dollars in exchange for the rights to operate the servers, what would discourage them from cashing out?
The internet is fundamentally a privatized system that exists to generate profit for investors. There is no true public domain. Its all just turf up for sale, some of which hasn't gone to a notable bidder yet. If you do manage to improve a patch of digital real estate to the point where someone will pay you enormous sums to divest, you'd be a fool not to take the money.
Not immune, but let's say resistant. Due to federation, they couldn't lock down existing federated content; due to open source they couldn't lock down the user experience; and due to those two, nobody's going to offer them a check for a couple million dollars.
-
something that won’t fall into the same pitfal
What exists that cannot be sold to a high enough bidder? Even Lemmy isn't magically immune. If the admins of .world got handed checks for a couple million dollars in exchange for the rights to operate the servers, what would discourage them from cashing out?
The internet is fundamentally a privatized system that exists to generate profit for investors. There is no true public domain. Its all just turf up for sale, some of which hasn't gone to a notable bidder yet. If you do manage to improve a patch of digital real estate to the point where someone will pay you enormous sums to divest, you'd be a fool not to take the money.
Even Lemmy isn’t magically immune. If the admins of .world got handed checks for a couple million dollars in exchange for the rights to operate the servers, what would discourage them from cashing out?
Nothing, but it would be far less disastrous than say some billionaire buying the town square of the internet.
Because it's federated, everyone can just leave. There is nothing stopping people from ditching .world and moving on.
-
What genuinely confuses me is who they're finding to buy this shit to begin with.
I've seen so many of these failed "Join our club to score points to get tokens to buy virtual dongles that you can use to get into our more-elite clubs with better points and color tokens" schemes over the last ten years. It's like everyone wants to be Chuck-E-Cheese, nevermind that the company went bankrupt five years ago.
Even if all you care about is profit, it seems like this is an abysmal means of generating it.
Oh it's undoubtedly going to fail, but it should milk enough money out of their users to keep them going while their investors cash out
-
I don't think Revolt is Fediverse, afaik it's entirely centralized without plans for interop or federation
Please update me if I just didn't find the right referenceAs of right now, Revolt does not feature any federation and it is not in our feature roadmap.
However, this does not necessarily mean federation is off the table, possible avenues are:
- Implement our own federation protocol
- Implement a promising up and coming federation protocol, polyproto
- Implement the Matrix protocol (unlikely, obtuse and unstable)
- Implement the XMPP protocol (battle-tested and stable)
-
The thing is I’d much rather they do things like this, where the ads are opt in and the monetized features are mostly just extra for if you are enjoying the platform, than something like introducing ads you have to pay to remove or locking core features behind a paywall.
-
What genuinely confuses me is who they're finding to buy this shit to begin with.
I've seen so many of these failed "Join our club to score points to get tokens to buy virtual dongles that you can use to get into our more-elite clubs with better points and color tokens" schemes over the last ten years. It's like everyone wants to be Chuck-E-Cheese, nevermind that the company went bankrupt five years ago.
Even if all you care about is profit, it seems like this is an abysmal means of generating it.
It is a bit baffling. I think it's more ethical than the alternative though: pay gating useful functionality. Offering paid pallete swaps doesn't make a lot of sense to me, someone who would never pay for that, but it does at least mean I can just ignore it. If they were to, say, restrict voice calls to a paid subscription, suddenly I'm in a position where either I'm paying for the service or ditching it entirely.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Is there a peer to peer equivalent to Discord? That feels like it would be the best option, since it wouldn't rely on a centralized company that could enshittify the product.
-
Oh it's undoubtedly going to fail, but it should milk enough money out of their users to keep them going while their investors cash out
ah yes, seeing deepweb market-esque exit scams on the surface web is a sign of a healthy system
-
Hopefully Revolt (a Fediverse alternative to Discord) continues to improve and can completely take the place of Discord relatively soon.
Edit: it might only be FOSS, not federated. Still a promising project though.
Afaik it's a fork / copy of the actual Discord source code. With all its bugs
-
This has been tried and tried again. The first time I remember seeing this was in the '90's where a "free" dial up ISP was trying this. NetZero maybe? Didn't work then, won't work now. They'll pay out so little it won't be worth it. Don't do it kids!
I basically had an adblocker for netzero making it a free service. Was super useful for my broke teenage ass.
-
Is there a peer to peer equivalent to Discord? That feels like it would be the best option, since it wouldn't rely on a centralized company that could enshittify the product.
Only option available is Matrix. It has its problems, but they're being worked on.
Right now it lacks the gaming/voice chat parts of discord - so for an OSS alternative for that part of discord specifically, there's Mumble.
For everything else, Matrix is a good alternative. Just be sure to pick a discord-like client. (E.g. Commet or Cinny)
-
Happy to have folks on e2ee matrix. It supports calling directly and group voice and video chat rooms quite well IMO.
God, I just wish they'd add a fucking Push to Talk option to a client... Any client
-
Even Lemmy isn’t magically immune. If the admins of .world got handed checks for a couple million dollars in exchange for the rights to operate the servers, what would discourage them from cashing out?
Nothing, but it would be far less disastrous than say some billionaire buying the town square of the internet.
Because it's federated, everyone can just leave. There is nothing stopping people from ditching .world and moving on.
If I care about my account, it would suck. Can't migrate unless server allows me to
-
God, I just wish they'd add a fucking Push to Talk option to a client... Any client
Lol that's an absolutely fair request. Have you asked on Element github? Sounds like a Mich needed feature.
-
Oh it's undoubtedly going to fail, but it should milk enough money out of their users to keep them going while their investors cash out
Microsoft had a check ready for $10B.
I can't imagine how a new flavor of Buttcoin could compete with that.
-
Happy to have folks on e2ee matrix. It supports calling directly and group voice and video chat rooms quite well IMO.
Thanks for the suggestion; I'll download right away. =D
-
Even Lemmy isn’t magically immune. If the admins of .world got handed checks for a couple million dollars in exchange for the rights to operate the servers, what would discourage them from cashing out?
Nothing, but it would be far less disastrous than say some billionaire buying the town square of the internet.
Because it's federated, everyone can just leave. There is nothing stopping people from ditching .world and moving on.
Because it’s federated, everyone can just leave.
Because of the networking effect, people don't leave. People have stubbornly clung to Twitter and Facebook and YouTube in the face of enshittification.
This notion that everyone's just going to pick up and leave Lemmy hasn't even worked on Reddit, the OG thing everyone was supposed to pick up and leave after it went to shit.
-
Users on reddit and lemmy always seem to think ad-based stuff is going to fail, and then it turns out people in the real world are depressingly accepting of ads. I would bet that this program is more likely to be expanded than canceled.
Part of that is because ads that are enjoyable and for things people enjoy often don't even register as ads to people. When people think of ads they typically think of unwanted distractions for things they don't want. They don't necessarily think of something like a free sticker for their favorite video game given to them at s convention. They may even put it on something like a laptop or water bottle. The same people may say they "hate ads".
I'm not trying to throw shade on those people, I think pretty much everyone is going to be accepting of at least some type of hypothetical thing that's enjoyable and/or useful to them. A prime exam is having a business listed in a directory. Someone mentioned that as an alternative to advertising as if companies don't pay to put their names in those directories.
None of this is meant to be any sort of criticism against anyone based on what they do or don't view as an ad, I'm just trying to help explain why, at least some of the time, it seems "people in the real world are depressingly accepting of ads."
-
It is a bit baffling. I think it's more ethical than the alternative though: pay gating useful functionality. Offering paid pallete swaps doesn't make a lot of sense to me, someone who would never pay for that, but it does at least mean I can just ignore it. If they were to, say, restrict voice calls to a paid subscription, suddenly I'm in a position where either I'm paying for the service or ditching it entirely.
They already do pay-gate useful functionality, this is just an alternative revenue stream
