It’s easier to read at least, but we loose the etymology.

I also liked the idea of shavian, but I eventually drowsed myself into anglish or what you might call frenchless english or plain english.

That is not to say shavian is not worth your time, it certainly is markworthy.

I think the word “open instance” could be used in place of decentralized. So when we frame it as open discussion instance, it is a reference to how the instance is decentralized.

Not bad, but I personally don’t like centering the attention on platforms because then we are drawing attention away from the instances. By centering attention on instances, we normalize instances and allow them to thrive.

I’d say something in the direction of Discussion Instances for communities.

Lemmy is an open townhall hive that offers public sharing of links, letters and images.

Too long; Didn’t read: Read last paragraph.

We need to understand the target audience if we want to get a good description. Speaking for myself, I would set the target audience to chronically online people who want to leave corporate walldoms, but I’d also choose a type of communication that focus on the actual service instead of comparing it to other serices. I’d not copy paste description from inspiration source. I’d be willing to reimagine what it is that we are developing.

I’d use communication that is less branded, and more understanding of the soul of the service. Its like saying “orange soda” instead of “fanta”, “search engine” instead of “google” or “car” instead of “Toyota”. The difference is by using this kind of language, we move ourselves away from dependency on the producers towards dependency on the tool.

Understanding the soul also requires that we have a culturally connected understanding of that which we discuss. That is to use less technical communication and more down to earth communication. To not play into sophistication. Less abbreviations, less techno jargon, more plain english, more understanding the equivalents of real life. For example, in the Gemini Protocol of small web, they use the word “capsule” instead of “instance”, which it feel more physical and more real. “Instance” on the other hand makes it sound like a computer thing and not related to reality.

About the soul, we should ask ourselves what the service feels like. Lemmy feels like small townhalls, or like a guy in the street yelling “Guys! What do you think of this drawing.” Perhaps a little gossipy or something like that. Ask yourself, what does lemmy feel like for you? Or what do you want lemmy to feel like? From here I choose “townhall” simply because it works for the purpose.

The above example also gives weight to the idea of physicality. When something feels physical, it feels real, and we feel drawn to it. In contrast, the abstract “instance” makes it more of a curiosity. We can talk of “towns”, “homes” or “hives” instead of “instances”. We can talk of “continents” of loosely connected hives instead of fediverse of platforms of instances. From here I choose “hive” because it distinguishes itself clearly to prevent misunderstandings.

With the physicality and smallness of “hive”, we can also encourage small scale thinking. Because no hives has a million bees. If you see a hive of a million inhabitants, you are going to be drawn towards smaller hives.

I’d also center the attention away from platforms and towards the hives and their interconnectedness. In this way we emphasize the decentralization aspect. The willingness to associate with other hives. I frame this as a hive being “open”.

This means we can talk of fediverse instances as open hives. Mastodon becomes shortletter hives, pixelfed becomes open gallery hive, peertube becomes open video hive.

So to be blunt, I’d suggest open townhall hive.

I use message.casa.

Framasoft should move to USA! It would be the greatest. It’s the most beautfiul country in the world. I promise.

I use the tracker webdriver Miniflux using the paid hosting which is 15$ a year. On my phone I use the tracker News from the library fdroid to sync to the webdriver.

They just really want to get to know you.

Doesnt work that well for me. Some bugs here and there.

I have started using message.casa.

Being private as obidient protects being private as disobidient.

If the days last longer, thats a plus in my book.

From reading the book you gave me, I feel much more aligned with materialism. I believe that matter is the realest and the spirit world is less real - if I may put it like that.

That doesn’t mean that I think we should view everything from a materialist lense.

The materialist lense is synonymous with the scientific method. But science isn’t suitable for everything. Science is slow, rigid, unaccessible and never answers wholistically. Oftentimes science isn’t the right approach.

For deem, if he wants to befriend her, he could look up research papers on the best approach to do so, but if she responds with something he hasn’t studied, then he will have to go back to the drawing board. In this case it would be better for him to lean on meta physics such as “trusting his gut feeling” or “make her feel valued”. This approach moves away from materialism, but that doesn’t mean that he has turned into a luney coocoo head.

Or what you say?

I’m on kolektiva.social. Nothing to complain about.

I am of the opinion that technology needs a language reform. The current day technology language makes it seem highly technical and it doesn’t have to be like that. For deem, we don’t view nature as too technical even though it is more complex than our technologies. How we discuss nature is meaningful, whereas how we discuss technology is narrow minded.

I like to use more physical words. Such as town or nest. For instance I used to be on a norwegian site which translates to Freetown, but I have now moved to Hedgehognest.

I think it has a lot to do with that we are trying to copy a model that only works for the mighty. Youtube depends on surveillance automatized algorithms. The surveillance is what makes their service work. This is not a type of algorithm we should copy from youtube. But that is what peertube has done. They rely on an algorithm that plays on surveillance. This means that the peertube experience is subpar.

What we should do instead is rely on algorithms that rely on people actively pointing out to likeminded videos. To let people be the algorithm just like how people were the algorithm of the early web. Perhaps that we associate our channel with other likeminded channels. Or that we actively point people towards the videos we think are relevant to the current video.

They always do.

In other words, you say that we should just give up.