Strypey (was at is a user on You can follow them or interact with them if you have an account anywhere in the fediverse. If you don't, you can sign up here.

More disturbingly bad pop psychology misdiagnosis of the "social media" problem ...

> "The mainstream social internet is so big; everyone is connected to everyone, over a billion on Facebook alone. The consequences of connection — fake news, radicalization, massive targeted harassment campaigns, algorithmically-generated psychological torment, inane bullshit — were not part of what we were sold."

I agree all these things are bad, but they're not new, and they're definitely not "consequences of connection", but the consequences of corporate-owned media, ad-based revenue model, and political bitterness caused by rising inequality. We migrated to the net in the 90s because the same perfect storm had hopelessly warped TV, and we naively thought the net might be different.

Strypey (was at @strypey

All the pearl-clutching and hand-wringing over weird YT kids videos makes we wonder if any of these people ever saw kids TV? I well remember the terrifyingly weird psy-op tactics advertisers used to prime kids to use "pester power", both in the "programs" themselves (remember Transformers and Masters of the Universe toys and their "TV shows") as well as in the ad breaks between them.

The good news is, it's still much cheaper and easier to set up a webserver or any other kind of internet server for ourselves, individually or as a community, than it has ever been to set up a micro-radio ("pirate radio") or micro-TV ("pirate TV") broadcast. I helped set up some micro-radio stations in early 2000s, so I'm speaking from experience here. Plus, servers can do a much greater range of things, and any webserver has much greater potential reach than local radio or TV (cool as they are)

@strypey Agree with everything you say, including YT vs cartoons, but in order to get away from the corporate profit syndrome that drives most of what's bad on social media, the fediverse needs to rethink the "just create your own instance" model. Most people don't have the knowledge/resources/time to do that. They are willing to pay - via Patreon, for example - to support those who do, but we run the risk of missing the opportunity to make meaningful change.

Imagine a federated platform like that replace for distributing podcasts. It would have all the benefits of pirate radio (or ); diverse voices, a plurality of sources, decentralized production and consumption, plus all the benefits of iTunes; any podcaster can potentially heard by anyone in a global audience, and without the downsides of a platform controlled by a single gatekeeper like Apple corporation.


re: federated platform for podcasts...

while I'm not aware of an existing one, potentially funkwhale can serve this function...

@strypey Don't most people use RSS for podcasts?

(I don't know, I just know I listen to podcasts without using iTunes)

@artsyhonker iTunes uses rss to deliver podcasts, doesn't it? And #peertube will have rss support too. I think the point it to use the rss from anything but big corporations. @strypey

@switch @artsyhonker yes, "podcasting" began as Apple-speak for 'delivering audio blogs by ' before it became a generic buzzphrase ;P But like YT does for video, iTunes does more than just delivery, it's also a place to discover new content and new creators. We've had tube site stacks for years (, etc), but is a game changer because is allows federated search across multiple independent tube sites via .

@strypey @switch @artsyhonker ehhhh theres more to the history of the term #podcast then your letting on. There is a certain person over here on the #fediverse that is best suited to tell that story: @adam

@wakest @switch @artsyhonker @adam from what I remember the "pod" in "podcasting" refers to the iPod. Prior to that taking over as the generic term, I remember people talking about "audio-blogging".

@strypey @adam @artsyhonker @switch @wakest

> The word was originally suggested by Ben Hammersley as a portmanteau of "iPod" (a brand of media player) and "broadcast".

Links to

> But what to call it? Audioblogging? Podcasting? GuerillaMedia?

So, apparently a journalist from The Guardian coined and/or popularized it.

I don't like the term either and prefer to simply call them audio feeds.

@notclacke @adam @artsyhonker @switch @wakest I would object more if they were called "iPodcasts", and if most people hadn't already forgotten the origin of the term ;) "Audio feeds" is fine amongst us geeks (who know what a "feed" is in a digital context) but I can't see it overtaking "podcasting" on the inside at this point in the race.

@strypey @wakest @switch @artsyhonker @adam Yeah, nah. And "web radio" seems to apply only to things that actually air and then is also put on the web. So it's hard to find a good term that people might actually accept.

What annoys me ten times more than "podcast" for an audio feed/log/whatever, is "podcast" for a podcast episode! People do this for "blog" as well. "Look at this blog we wrote last Wednesday.", "Listen to this podcast, it's an interview with XYZ.".

@notclacke I'm on the same page about episodes/podcast. But just to play the devil's advocate, is the expression "we just did a broadcast" used in a radio setting or not really?
@strypey @wakest @artsyhonker @adam

@notclacke There's also something that bothers me, the websites that name their audio releases a podcast when there IS NO EFFING FEED AVAILABLE. If there isn't a feed for me to catch the thing with a client, IT IS NOT A PODCAST. @strypey @wakest @artsyhonker @adam

@switch @adam @artsyhonker @wakest @strypey Oh yeah, this is just cringe. A podcast is an audio feed by another name. Just some website with pages with audio player widgets is not.

@notclacke @switch @adam @artsyhonker @wakest noobs don't know about "RSS" and "feeds" and language drift happens. "podcast" now just means 'any kind of audio show you can listen to online'.

@strypey noobs don't know jack shit about anything. Are we going to throw away the dictionary for this reason? ;) :p @notclacke @adam @artsyhonker @wakest

@switch @notclacke @adam @artsyhonker @wakest dictionaries don't dictate what words mean, they just document common usage. Much as it might pain us,"google" is now listed as an English verb in the dictionary. That's why is a thing, and why it's entries are so intriguing

@strypey that sounds right. It mustn't stop us from using words in the way they were intended to, though, don't you think? @notclacke @adam @artsyhonker @wakest

@switch @notclacke @adam @artsyhonker @wakest when was the last time you heard someone say they were "feeling gay" to tell you how happy they were, or use gay as a noun to describe someone as an "excellent person, noble lady, gallant knight"?

@switch @notclacke @adam @wakest @strypey Hey, I tend toward descriptivism myself, but can you un-@ me please? thanks.

@artsyhonker for future reference, Mastodon gives you the ability to 'mute conversation', which effectively allows you to untag yourself from a thread you're no longer interested in.

@strypey Ha, you got me there. But I'll keep using podcast in the way I prefer anyway. :p @notclacke @adam @wakest

@switch @notclacke @adam @wakest fair enough :) Sometimes words fork and exactly the same word, with exactly the same spelling, can come to have two very different but equally legitimate meanings. eg "Library" can mean a building full of books, or a package of code.

@strypey It would miss one extremely popular feature for creators, accurate analytics.

@moonman not necessarily. There are plenty of analytics packages ( etc) that could be built in or integrated using plug-ins.

@moonman also, I believe is building in the ability to do accurate view counts and some replacement for 'likes' across a federated platform, which could be re-used for a podcasting platform

@strypey @moonman Not sure how a federated platform really could accurately count views, as any of the nodes could be lying. As far as I can see, it works require some Bitcoin like leger of each view to be verifiable. That would be prohibitive though, as views are much more voluminous than transactions in BTC.

@Blort @moonman the same way
> Not sure how a federated platform really could accurately count views

the same way any other network of trackers do?

@strypey One of the biggest problems the fediverse has is discoverability. And podcasts have always been federated. Creators host their own podcasts on their site. The centralization came later to solve the discoverability problem.
@DystopianK @strypey

I actually opened an issue on the funkwhale repo requesting podcast support. The lead dev was open to the idea, but I don't think it'll happen until at least 1.0. It's a small project, so he wants to focus on the main feature set.

@0x1C3B00DA @DystopianK it may be worth having a project dedicated to federated podcast discovery and delivery, rather than trying to get to add features that don't serve it's core purpose. Maybe a soft fork, where back-end code is shared where appropriate, but the UIs are developed separately, each focused on its own use case?

@strypey @0x1C3B00DA a soft fork should work since is audio in both cases, maybe even making instances of podcsat only (and the user interface like you said)

@strypey ... and, of course, all the additional complexity of running a highly available distributed environment. 😉

@z428 maybe, but this doesn't seem to have stopped the emerging as a decentralized replacement for "social media" datafarms, or as a decentralized replacement for tube site datafarms. Resilience comes at a cost of reduced efficiency, but efficiency comes at a cost of reduced resilience, and I feel like the net pendulum needs to swing back towards resilience in a big way.

@strypey Yes, but resilience only on a larger level, not for an individual user. If one instance fails, goes down or is taken down (legally), the network keeps working but all users on this instance are in trouble. That's why I sometimes wonder whether federation is a good way for building a service on par with Twitter or YouTube - as people simply *expect* to be able to reach their contacts...

@z428 these are solvable problems. allows full portability of accounts between hosts using the aspect of their protocol.
At the moment we are using 1.0. Once all the codebases have support rolled out, and added all the features that makes available we will get to fediverse 2.0. Full portability of accounts between hosts will come with a fediverse 3.0, based on a protocol set that either extends AP or replaces it.

@strypey I've had a lot of thoughts while reading this relatively short thread, but this is a topic close to my heart, and I'd like to share some of those thoughts. I just want to apologize in advance if they're a bit all over the place

@strypey first of all, having a private content server for children's television was an idea I had in college ten years ago, and as I'm preparing to start a family now, it's become relevant again. Secondly, for much of that decade, I've been involved with a web broadcast group, and have been privy to some of the concerns and hassle involved in running a server that accommodates a few dozen people. Third, I really like the advances in federated internet services

@strypey shit, I'm at work trying to write on my phone, and I've already started drawing an outline. I'll come back to this after a while

@rubah seems to me the question is not 'do people want this', parents have wanted a bounded space for child-friendly, ad-free kids entertainment since before the web was a thing. Seems obvious to me that a web-stream service operated by a parent-owned cooperative, funded by subs, is the right legal structure and revenue model to use. The hard question is, how to bootstrap it?

@strypey this was certainly a big thing in the Anglosphere from 1970s onwards (especially for toy adverts and junk food), though regulators in some Northern European countries were a bit stricter about this.

UK clamped down on junk food ads about 12 years ago, causing commercial ITV to stop making kids TV altogether as they'd become dependent on the ad funding, leaving the state broadcaster BBC the main commissioner of this and the sweets companies shifting to online..

@vfrmedia ae, and thus all those advertisers moved where the eyeballs moved, just as they did from newspapers to TV, and now they're putting their creepy propaganda on YT. The solution isn't to demonize the net and go back to TV (the conservative solution), but to have cooperatives of parents setting up narrowly-federated instances, so they can collectively control content and explore alternative forms of funding it.

@strypey I don't think going back to TV is even feasible as European public service broadcasters are struggling to fund production these days for kids and youth TV, but using Peertubewould be much better than the current situation of streaming (I don't even think sweets are that bad if kids are able to play outdoors, ride bikes and get other exercise, I'm more concerned over teen/young adult youtube "stars" being sponsored to encourage consumerism amongst pre-teens and teenagers..)

@vfrmedia @strypey
Strypey, I think you've invented Public Broadcasting. And that sounds right. While we can debate the technical merits and limitations of Peertube... that we need some kind of public broadcasting network for streaming sounds absolutely right.

@falkreon @strypey

possibly a minor difference in terminology but maybe public access broadcasting is a better comparison?

In European countries, public (service) broadcasting often means incumbent state broadcasters like the BBC, ARD/ZDF (DE), NPO (NL), SVT (SE) etc, all of which have heavily invested in their own (walled garden) streaming networks, and/or also smaller channels such as those run by faith groups.

What is being proposed here appears to be something more independent than this?

@falkreon @strypey

I also saw a discussion elsewhere about developing a federated video system (maybe based on peertube?) that would be safe(r) for LGBT+ and other minorities (attempting to avoid risks of harrasment via comments etc)

This, especially if it allows whitelisting of federated instances, could be equally useful for safeguarding content for the under 18s (I'm sure it could do a better job than something run for the benefit of USA advertisers and corporate shareholders!)

@vfrmedia @falkreon I imagine it would be pretty trivial to modify to allow instances to choose between a) open federation, b) running a blocklist, c) subscribing to one or more shared blocklists, d) federating only with approved instances, e) federated with all instances on a shared 'allowed' list.

right now PeerTube instances are followed manually by the administrator, so it's more of a whitelist.
We are tracking improvements on
@falkreon @strypey

@rigelk @vfrmedia @falkreon that seems like a good approach. Give the admin maximum control over federation boundaries as the baseline, then add more automated options over time.

@vfrmedia @strypey
Maybe a difference in how our respective systems came about. In the US in the pre-cable days, a bunch of locally-run radio and TV stations put their heads together to form a nonprofit, funded by a grant (that didn't come from the stations themselves, but the Ford Foundation), so that it could buy good educational material and distribute it to any local station that wanted it. The content just didn't exist until there was a buyer, because thoughtful creators didn't have the resources to make it for free.

@vfrmedia @falkreon I've done some work in my home country on getting public service broadcasting to use software and , and getting publicly funded content shared under licenses. Success here requires the decision-makers to hear it asked by people other than geeks, so educating people who support public broadcasting about these issues, and why the commons paradigm makes sense here, is crucial.

@strypey @falkreon I've seen similar things crop up from time to time via the EBU (they still send me their tech magazine due to my work with a community radio station in recent years), and a trend amongst for least some content of North European public broadcasters to be shared more widely

(even the BBC is doing this more often in recent times, such as the release of a load of 1980s tech related content to the public domain)