You are more restricted in who you can communicate with.
Vendor lock-in. (you can't migrate between hosts)
Bait and switch money operation? If I'm not giving them money, how does that affect me?
If you buy a stolen car, you could say, 'It does not affect me. After all, it was not my car that was stolen.' You are only supporting the theft of other people's cars by your purchase.
I don't migrate between hosts on the websites I visit, so not being able to migrate is not a loss.
And I don't think Gab is offering me a stolen product - which I'm using at no cost, so it doesn't compare to buying stolen property. At least not the way you've explained it.
I'm looking at it from a simple perspective. There are communists/marxists, and there are humans. You're telling me about vendor lock-in, and I have no idea what that means. But I'm pretty sure Torba ain't a communist.
The analogy of a stolen car doesn't fully apply to all aspects. It is not a good analogy, in that way. The part that is true is about rewarding unethical practice and what that means for the system.
Vendor lock-in means that resources you build require continuing use of Gab.
With use of Gab, you discover user accounts you wish to pay attention to with time. You require a Gab account to
subscribe to several people's messages.
send messages to those people
view details, such as who accounts you are interested in follow.
These things are not true on the other software with federated architecture.
Thanks for the explanation, but to my uninformed mind, it seems like this would be true of most platforms. To follow someone on Facebook, you need a Facebook account, To follow and DM on Twitter, you need to have a Twitter account, etc.
It sounds like you're protesting Gab over something common, while ignoring that they are technically the same as most other social media, while politically completely different.
In the software I advocate, it is not necessary to have an account on the same host/node/server in order to follow or respond to other accounts. Gab copied and then changed the Mastodon software. Gab removed that ability from the software.
Indeed, it is an uncommon feature. I guess most people do not know it is available.
Go on and try the others out. Some of the most free ones are linked from the article.
How do we get traction to get people to use the better services? The reason Gab got big is because of publicity.
because he won't let lewed loli porn on gab he is a fascist? Piss off.
What is the reason for not using Gab?
Click the link and read.
I did, and didn't see a reason not to use Gab. Bait and switch money operation? If I'm not giving them money, how does that affect me?
I expected businesses to try to make money. I'm okay with that. It's a billion times better than Twitter or any other leftist own platform.
Other points:
If you buy a stolen car, you could say, 'It does not affect me. After all, it was not my car that was stolen.' You are only supporting the theft of other people's cars by your purchase.
I don't think your comparison makes sense.
I don't migrate between hosts on the websites I visit, so not being able to migrate is not a loss.
And I don't think Gab is offering me a stolen product - which I'm using at no cost, so it doesn't compare to buying stolen property. At least not the way you've explained it.
I'm looking at it from a simple perspective. There are communists/marxists, and there are humans. You're telling me about vendor lock-in, and I have no idea what that means. But I'm pretty sure Torba ain't a communist.
The analogy of a stolen car doesn't fully apply to all aspects. It is not a good analogy, in that way. The part that is true is about rewarding unethical practice and what that means for the system.
Vendor lock-in means that resources you build require continuing use of Gab. With use of Gab, you discover user accounts you wish to pay attention to with time. You require a Gab account to
These things are not true on the other software with federated architecture.
Thanks for the explanation, but to my uninformed mind, it seems like this would be true of most platforms. To follow someone on Facebook, you need a Facebook account, To follow and DM on Twitter, you need to have a Twitter account, etc.
It sounds like you're protesting Gab over something common, while ignoring that they are technically the same as most other social media, while politically completely different.
I don't imagine this getting a lot of traction.
In the software I advocate, it is not necessary to have an account on the same host/node/server in order to follow or respond to other accounts. Gab copied and then changed the Mastodon software. Gab removed that ability from the software.
Indeed, it is an uncommon feature. I guess most people do not know it is available.
Go on and try the others out. Some of the most free ones are linked from the article.
How do we get traction to get people to use the better services? The reason Gab got big is because of publicity.
Formerly created to Stop The Steal, this has expanded scope to new projects.
Infrastructure for integrity of government, elections, society: Wiki, Chat, and More.
The link to why is at the top.
So why?
And no, "click the link" without any further explanation is not the right answer.