I think one of the biggest obstacles in donations is lack of transparency of what’s going on with the donated money.
Nowadays I tend to only donate to projects that have full transparency on what the money is being used for.
I don’t know if it’s the case as the presented case is not an instance I use. But on general before donating any money is the first thing I look up, and if it’s not clear I just hold my money.
But it is known that donations usually cannot sustain projects, specially “user donations”. For a project to be able to have a steady and sizeable influx of money there need to be whale donators or corporations that donate to it. Relying on user donations will always mean a very little amount of money, and I don’t think that’s going to change as most people don’t have that much disposable income anyway.
I think p2p and true decentralization is the way to go. Don’t get me wrong, fediverse is great, but is not as much decentralized as “less centralized”, truly decentralized model should be p2p. I’ve said several times that the ess centralized" model have a critical failure point and that is that instances are under a lot of pressure, economic, legal and administrative. And we are burning people out and spending all their money, because it’s a model that relies in a few number of people taking that big burden.
I think a model that the burden is smaller and more spread among the user base will be more resilient, at least on this aspect.
Also I take the chance to put up a critique on domain costs, it’s not much, but it’s part of this topic and surely they should be cheaper, as domain cost is 90% speculation and very little labor cost. I don’t know if there’s any project to democratize domain names in the clearnet, but there should be one.
Yep, cant even see how much they got a month or anything like that as far as im aware, there are some piracy sites where the donation number stays at like 200/350 goal forever and it feels like you really never kniw if they’re just making bank and pretending to be in need lol
Hi all. It’s Jerry from the interview talking about infosec.exchange. I think it’s important to understand some apparently missing context in the discussions below. I was talking about a hypothetical future where we saw tens/hundreds of millions of active accounts on the fediverse. I don’t believe the current funding model can support that, and I also don’t think the “spin up your own host” model will work for the masses, either.
I host close to two dozen different fediverse services, from lemmy to mastodon to mbin to peertube and lots more, and all that takes some significant hardware to run at larger scales. My objective has been to provide a fast and reliable fediverse experience, and so I’ve focused more on that than on making my servers scream, and so I’ve landed on hosting the fleet on a series of Hetzner Dell servers with 10GB interfaces, and that is not cheap.
Thank you
Time to start putting ads in.
Abso-fucking-lutely not. People need to be able to exist without having hypercommercialism forced on them everywhere.
I’d rather have a… gags… Subscription.
I support ads.
Oh, calm down. I don’t support the ad level of Facebook, nor the targeted ads, nor the algorithm.
And we, as users, get to decide when too many ads are too many, with our feet.
start a nonprofit that hosts services, gather donations for equipment and other stuff.
what is so difficult here?
omg and do NOT do fireside chats like you are a bunch of enlightened executives. no wonder you need to beg for donations.
Feddit.dk is not a huge Lemmy instance but I’ve managed to not have to pay anything so far due to generous user donations. It works quite well I think. I think Mastodon is just not quite as effective in gathering people like this to donate, that’s my guess at least.
Misskey is probably the only fediverse software that actually allows admin instance to put ads.
Its flagship instance, misskey.io (which also the second/third (?) biggest instances on fediverse), use freemium scheme for running the server. They have to do this as they have 600K users, with 20K visits per day. Their paid tier upgrades are mostly adding non-essentials stuff, such as drive capacity from 5GB to 30-100GB, profile and avatar decoration (similar to Discord stuff), or more webhook. They runs community ads, from indie games, vtuber promotion, comic release, or local art event. They also have one corporate backer, Skeb.jp, which an art commissioning platform.
Not saying that all instance should do this, but it could be a great learning.
I wouldn’t mind ads like these.
The thing is that ads pay almost nothing. I’d be very happy to pay 4x what an ad would pay. But the problem is I can’t sent 0.12 to someone when I watch their video because 50% of that is gobbled up by transaction fees. So the only option is to bulk donate which either requires pooling money in a 3rd party or the user donating a bulk amount ($10). Users really dont like giving away $10 when it feels like they get nothing in return. Its all mental but its a very real problem. We will pay for $10 of dogshit food but not $10 for a software product we’ve used for 100s of hours.
You can actually do it using USDC (USD stablecoin) on Ethereum via Base for free:
https://www.coinbase.com/en-br/developer-platform/discover/launches/zero-fee-usdc
Most people think of crypto as a scam, but there are actual useful products being built on Ethereum, and this is a great illustration on where it is a useful tool
I think something like this is going to be a necessity to make a federates video platform work.
What are the transaction fees for USDC?
Join the Communick Collective. Set up a fixed budget (let’s say $10/month) and then split that however you want between the people you want to help. This solves the micropayments issue and would show creators still addicted to Youtube revenue that valuable contributions will be rewarded.
Freemium is the way to go. All the essential features are free; you can pay for extra stuff like special emojis, coins(like Reddit silver/gold), or customizable profiles. It could be either a subscription or à la carte.
Simply giving something in return would incentivize people to donate more.
Unlike Reddit, the profit should give back to the communities by adding more features, paying developers to maintain open source projects, giveaways etc.
The only real option is to charge people.
Hosting isn’t free. It costs money to run a website. That money needs to come from somewhere. If it doesn’t come from advertisers, it must come from users.There could be a verity options for that. But I like the simple annual subscription. Each and every user pays. Spread out the cost as much as possible. It’s only fair.
Provided there is an “upper limit” on what scale we are talking, Ive often wondered, couldn’t private users also host a sharded copy of a server instance to offset load and bandwidth? Like Folding@Home, but for site support.
I realize this isn’t exactly feasible today for most infra, but if we’re trying to “solve” the problem, imagine if you were able to voluntarily, give up like 100gb HDD space and have your PC host 2-3% of an instance’s server load for a month or something. Or maybe just be a CDN node for the media and bandwidth heavy parts to ease server load, while the server code is on different machines.
This kind of distributed “load balancing” on private hardware may be a complete pipe dream today, but it think if might be the way federated services need to head. I can tell you if we could get it to be as simple as volunteers spinning up a docker, and dropping the generated wireguard key and their IP in a “federate” form to give the mini-node over to an instance, it would be a lot easier to support sites in this way.
Speaking for myself, I have enough bandwidth and space I could lend some compute and offset a small amount of traffic. But the full load of a popular instance would be more than my simple home setup is equipped for. If contributing hosting was as easy as contributing compute, it could have a chance to catch on.
Something similar is available for PeerTube:
- Platform redundancy by P2P, and
- offload of transcoding and transcription to Remote Runners
- This is not how the fediverse works. Each server keeps a whole copy to themselves of all that they’ve accessed in the federation.
- Cost of hardware is only a fraction of the total cost. Even if we solved the issue of running the Fediverse at scale with negligible costs, we still are not accounting for all the labor of volunteers, instance admins and developers.
I realize that is not how the fediverse works. I’m not speaking about the content delivery as much as the sever orchestration.
That’s why I’m saying if somehow it could work that way, it would be one way to offset the compute and delivery burdens. But it is a very different paradigm from normal hosting. There would have to be some kind of swarmanagement layer that the main instance nodes controlled.
My point was only that, should such a proposal be feasible one day, if you lower the barriers you could have more resources.
I myself have no interest in hosting a full blown private instance of Lemmy or mastodon, but I would happily contribute 1tb of storage and a ton of idle compute to serving the content for my instance if I could. That’s where this thinking stemmed from. Many users like me could donate their “free” idle power and space. But currently it is not feasible.
Instead of going for these complicated architectures, it would be better to simplify and make activitypub less dependent on server software.
Great link, and I fully agree. If it’s possible anyways.
That’s not really how it works. If it was made to work that way, it would still be a relatively small group donating their own compute resources to subsidize everyone else. Which is what we already have, and isn’t very scalable.
I responded above, but my point kind of was that it doesn’t work that way, but as we rethinking content delivery we should also rethinking hosting distribution. What I was saying is not a “well gee we should just do this…” type of suggestion, but more a extremely high level idea for server orchestration from a public private swarm that may or may not ever be feasible, but definitely doesn’t really exist today.
Imagine if it were somewhat akin to BitTorrent, only the user could voluntarily give remote control to the instance for orchestration management. The orchestration server toggles the nodes contents so that, lets say, 100% of them carry the most accessed data (hot content, <100gb), and the rest is sharded so they each carry 10% of the archived data, making each node require <1tb total. And the node client is given X number of pinned CPUs that can be used for additional server compute tasks to offload various queries.
See, I’m fully aware this doesn’t really exist on this form. But thinking of it like a Kubernetes cluster or a HA webclient it seems like it should be possible somehow to build this in a way where the client really only needs to install, and say yes to contribute. If we could cut it down to that level, then you can start serving the site like a P2P bittorrent swarm, and these power user clients can become nodes.
I think that would just be a different instance.
I just watched the section of the interview where Jerry (admin of fedia.io and infosec.exchange), and he said that
There are a lot of people who aren’t that lucky. Even charging a 1$ fee is too much. That is their lifeline, it’s their way to connect to friends, and search for jobs. To me, I don’t think it’s appropriate to gatekeep it with a monthly fee.
https://video.firesidefedi.live/w/1yNa4rLzzLXnuRoX7Rny3y?start=38m45s
Then you charge by default and carve out exceptions to those who can’t afford. Instead of having 2% of people donating and 98% of freeloaders, make it that every 5 paying subscribers guarantee one free spot. Alternatively, set up a Caffe sospeso system where donations are still accepted, but accounted directly for someone who wants to claim it.
There is really no excuse to keep the donation model as a rule.
Jerry was in this thread, feel free to convince him rather than me: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/46526295/19376934
Most people are only willing to pay with non-monetary resources (PII, ad data, etc.). You can’t approach this with charging money in mind, because people will just go back to the places where they aren’t expected to pay. Start charging for Mastodon? The majority will go to Bluesky, Twitter, and Threads. Lemmy would just feed back to Reddit. Either that or they’ll drop off social media altogether.
We’ve already got proof of this: PeerTube. Most PeerTube instances either charge a fee to upload (call it a ‘donation’ if you prefer, but if you’re gating an action behind money, that’s a fee), or simply don’t allow any users not connected to the admin to upload. YouTube, Twitch, Dailymotion, and a few other sites are free. The sites where it’s free to perform the core activity will keep winning, especially as we see rising inflation and increasing costs.
If you charge, you also have to offer a better experience than the free options. There’s no reason instances can’t use ads for people unwilling or unable to pay. For me I’ll gladly pay for an ad-free experience.
The reason they can’t show ads is actually pretty simple: if I’m going to have ads in my feed, I’m just going to go back to Reddit for the same experience. Plus, when you consider dbzer0 et al, you’re going to come to the conclusion that ads will either be a waste because everyone is using a strong adblock on Firefox or a browser that doesn’t care about Google manifest standards, or the people who see them will be incredibly pissed, leave the instance, and either return to Reddit (or an alternative) or move instances and make a lot of noise toward defed’ing from the ad-ridden instance.
For me, I would rather just run an adblock and an anti-adblock-blocker on a different service than go through the frustration of ads on a non-corp platform.
It sounds like you’re thinking there is no way to compete with Reddit. If you charge, people will use Reddit. If you have ads, people will use Reddit. People are only here because there aren’t ads and it’s free?
That’s basically correct, yes. I don’t see the fediverse platform(s) as being “special” compared to others. Sure, there’s political and social momentum that keeps people here, especially due to anticorporate causes. People are here because they got ticked about the Reddit API changes, the ads, and the monetization (Reddit Gold, etc).
If any of those things change, people will see that they’re not getting the value they were looking for, and will go back.
Do you know that the person you just responded to is one of the first subscribers of Communick?
No, I stopped looking at instance or software a while ago. The threadiverse has seemingly matured enough that the average user doesn’t have to care anymore.
It’s not about the software. I am just pointing out that Communick’s instances are only available for paying customers, so his argument (everyone should pay a little bit) is at the very least backed by his own actions.
Regarding Peertube: I see the problem of Peertube on the other end of what you are saying. People are not using that much because even those that have a presence on PeerTube still depend on YouTube to make money. If PeerTube had a way to help with monetization, then more creators would be interested in publishing exclusively on PeerTube, even if they had to pay something to upload/distribute videos.
Fair point about his actions, and I’m glad to see whales splashing about in the pond with the rest of us. I disagree strongly about everyone paying. We ‘pay’ by adding content and being members of the community. We pay by expanding the network and being a negative to Reddit. Money shouldn’t need to change hands.
See, I get your point on PeerTube, but I counter with the fact that we did have video online before YouTube. That wasn’t the revolution. It was the free hosting and free viewing that made YT a juggernaut. Same with streaming before ryan.tv. Before it was free, it was extremely niche. When monetary investment stopped being needed, it hit the mainstream. If the monetization of video content comes directly from viewers, you will go back to dedicated hobbyists and those who are certain that videos will be funded in advance.
I’m glad to see whales splashing about in the pond with the rest of us.
What “whale”? Communick costs less than $2.50 per month. It is less than the average donation people send around.
We ‘pay’ by adding content and being members of the community
No one can use your content to pay their bills.
We pay by expanding the network and being a negative to Reddit
The network is not expanding. It is stuck in this 1M-2M monthly active users (if you count all of the Fediverse) and Lemmy/kbin/piefed is hovering around 50-55k/MAU for two years already.
Meanwhile, Reddit’s revenue has grown 62% in 2024 (from $800M in 2023 to to $1.3B last year). Do you really think they care about losing a few thousand users who are all talk but no bite?
It was the free hosting and free viewing that made YT a juggernaut.
There were other platforms offering free video and free hosting as well. There were even p2p alternatives. Remember Joost? It’s not that people didn’t have a choice then and YouTube was better. It’s that could Google leveraged its capital to run Youtube at a loss for as long as needed until there was no competition left.
And if he will ask people to pay to use it, they will, rightfully so, switch to a different instance.
Ok? What on earth would be the motivation to let these people keep spending your money instead of letting them go spend someone else’s?
ETA: Especially if their reason for leaving is that you had the audacity to ask them to pitch in for the cost of the resources that they’re using. Oh, the humanity.
I am not sure if the “he” reference is me, but I did ask and people did step up to support the costs of running the instance.
So the question is, what the hell should we do about this? How do we solve this? How do we even approach to solving it? Should I setup a forum page, somewhere, or a chat, where people can discuss everything and start approaching something? Or are we simply doomed?
Let’s get rid of open registration instances and look for alternative models that are actually sustainable:
- Small servers run by self-hosting enthusiasts for their friends and family.
- Institutional servers (schools/universities running servers for faculty and students, companies running servers for their own employees)
- Servers run by media institutions for journalists + maybe for subscribers (on a separate domain)
- Servers provided by telcos, tied to their phone service (get a contract for mobile and that gives you access to our AP server)
- Commercial providers who charge a flat subscription for access (mastodon.green, omg.lol, my own communick)
We need to get rid of the idea that we can have a sustainable Fediverse infra running on volunteers alone. It is not working, all the growth potential that we have is stunted because people keep lying to themselves.
You can’t ask people to join small servers that have the biggest risk of shutting down without creating migration toola thst migrate all the content along the likes and comments
Size by itself is not the main predictor of risk. My instance is the only one on the Lemmy/kbin/Piefed side of the Fediverse that is exclusive for paying subscribers. It has never had more than 10 active users. This week it is celebrating its second anniversary - coincidentally I set it up on the same day as lemm.ee - and it has outlived a whole lot of instances.
I don’t know how this dismise my point. Small instances dies all the time. I am more preoccupied by death of instances on oixelfed though
Small instances dies all the time
Small hobbyist instances die all the time. Just like the medium ones and the large ones.
Small instances a lot more
Isn’t https://elest.io/open-source/lemmy still a thing? Different model from you, though.
Put those under “self-hosting”.
- Institutional servers (schools/universities running servers for faculty and students, companies running servers for their own employees)
This is the best long term strategy. News orgs should be hosting their own Mastodon instances at the very least. Same with schools and government.
It solves a number of problems - for them. So many news organizations and government offices are reliant on Xitter. That means that they are at the mercy of the owner of the platform for their messages to the public. Hosting their own instance puts them in charge. They can get out messages reliably and the public can trust that they are who they say… Just like an email address or URL.
Schools pay lots of money to private corporations to run bespoke university messaging systems, and are likewise reliant on those companies to provide administrative services such as moderating. Moving those communications in-house will be cheaper and simpler.
We should all be pressuring schools and local governments to adopt these technologies.
But that can not be the only solution. My university offered email accounts for every student. In 1999 this was a very big deal because the commercial services were super limited - Yahoo! Mail offered 2MB, IIRC. But the account was only available while you were an student.
I think it’s the best starting point. University and government resources can handle the volume and will motivate widespread adoption. In one sense, it is only kicking the can down the road, but it is kicking it into a future that will be better prepared for these questions.
I am not disagreeing, I just think these options are not mutually exclusive. We should try all of those that we can. And while I can not force schools and universities to implement their own Mastodon instance for their students, I can pay a little bit per month to support developers and service providers of the libre platforms out there.
Let’s get rid of open registration instances
How?
Nobody is stopping any of your bullet points from happening. Those are all options today. Any one of those groups can spin up an instance and nobody is going to stop them. Some already have
But isn’t the idea of forcing someone to (not) run their own server however they want antithetical to the whole concept of the fediverse?
You can defederate your personal server from open registration servers if you want. But you can’t “get rid of open registration instances.” That’s just stupid.
I am not saying that there should be an executive order to make open registrations illegal, or to force anyone to do it.
What I am saying is that the admins themselves should change their attitude about it. I understand that most of them are doing out of generosity and because they hope that by offering free spaces they will get more people to join, but I’d hope that by now most people would have realized that this is (a) not sustainable and (b) counterproductive. The reason that we don’t see a lot of the alternative models around is because the open registration instances suck out the air of everyone else in the economy.
If we keep working with this assumption that open registrations are fundamental to the Fediverse, we are going to continue is the slow decline to irrelevance. The Fediverse is never going to die, but it will be forever stunted in its potential.
That I can agree with. But I think it’s just inevitable growing pains. Free and open instances will, over time, shut down because they’re obviously unsustainable, so they won’t be sustained.
As they do, people will be left searching for instances to move to, and more and more, they’ll find that free instances just aren’t an available.
Then all the Fediverse is, is just a bump in the road for Reddit and Twitter.
Free and open instances will, over time, shut down because they’re obviously unsustainable, so they won’t be sustained.
How many of the 5.5k users from lemm.ee are going to say “Lesson learned. If I want an instance that is sustainable I should look for a professional instance or run my own”? I’m not going to say zero, but I really doubt it’s going to be “more than 3”.
The problem here is that while individual instances may die, there is always a new
suckerenthusiast coming up thinking “my server will be different”.Lemm.ee didn’t shut down because it was financially unsustainable though. It shut down because the admin team didn’t want to do it anymore.
Plenty of people have offered to take lemm.ee on and AFAIK nothing has progressed, but handled in a different way there could have been continuity and no need for users to transition away.
Given that the issue wasn’t one of finance and rather one of effort/will, how does charging for access change anything? The owner could decide they have had enough, walk away, and shut everything down anyway, no?
The problem here is that while individual instances may die, there is always a new
suckerenthusiast coming up thinking “my server will be different”.Not the nicest way to talk about @ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone, @Shadow@lemmy.ca or @Demigodrick@lemmy.zip
If you get rid of open registration instances and start charging, you’ll immediately lose huge amounts of users back to Reddit or whatever alternative is free to them. The echo chamber will be even more pronounced, and whatever success Lemmy/Mbin/Piefed have had will dry up.
Most people don’t want to self host. And most people aren’t willing to pay. So you have an issue in front of you. Do you actually want users and interactions? Or do you just want a place where very dedicated nerds can crow to each other about whatever self-hosting tricks they pulled off while occasionally backed by an addicted whale (who, upon noting the monotony and small userbase, will probably move on quickly)?
Everything, especially digital things, is backed by a small group of whales supporting everyone else. It’s a mix between addiction and community-building instincts. Right now, said whales are the server hosts and a handful of users. Because of the desire to lead a community, and the addiction of social media, it keeps going. You say it isn’t sustainable. I say it’s a cycle. The specific instances don’t matter until it becomes a corporate situation. All that matters is that there’s at least one instance with enough people active to provide the gratification to the whale.
If you get rid of open registration instances and start charging, you’ll immediately lose huge amounts of users
That is not necessarily true. you can have for example just a bunch of people that like to self host and they will invite their friend. This will be just a small constellation of smaller instances and they don’t have to be completely open registration.
Most people don’t want to self host.
You don’t need most. If 1% of the people can show initiative to self host and serve 100 people, it should be enough.
Everything, especially digital things, is backed by a small group of whales supporting everyone else.
Bad economics and bad incentives. What you are describing is not just a natural law that can be avoided, but it is part of the reason that we are in this mess.
Software has this amazing property of being virtually free to copy. But the things that we do it and the labor that is required of us still has a cost. We need to bring back some sense of human scale to digital platforms, and the only way to do it is by letting us set a limit to the size of the organizations.
That’s a decision for each server admin to decide for themselves. This particular admin has apparently decided that $5000/mo is worth it to them to run a server without ever asking people to pitch in, which I find absolutely bizarre, but whatever.
They can go a long way towards reducing that cost themselves by… asking their users to pitch in. Some people will pitch in, and reduce their out of pocket expenses. Others will leave, further reducing their out of pocket expenses.
If they haven’t done the bare minimum that they can do to help themselves, then this isn’t a problem for the broader fediverse community to solve.
The admin of the third largest mastodon instance is constantly asking for donations and still has trouble to pay his own rent.
If it was an exceptional case, I’d be glad to help. but when it happens every other month, it shows that this continued behavior of sacrificing your own well-being is irresponsible.
then this isn’t a problem for the broader fediverse community to solve
This is the natural end result of every volunteer run instance, you don’t find it odd that over the last 40 years of the internet not one fediverse like server or community has survived or even been mildly popular?
I’ll repost this because for some reason the other post got deleted, it was regarding lemm.ee shutting down, they were concerned that one of the largest Lemmy instances is shutting down and the future of Lemmy:
You’re 100% right to be concerned and to be honest I have doubts lemmy will ever crack more than a few million users, the same thing happened with Mastodon, something that relies so heavily on volunteers running the infra almost inevitably results in burnout because the fediverse works on a disincentive basis:
Basically the more popular a server is, the more funding it requires, the more admins it requires, the more work it requires, and all of this is on a slim margins or more likely requiring on people to donate time/money/effort ‘for free’ is a huge ask.
The supply of people sitting around doing nothing all day who care enough to dedicate their time/effort/money to running a social network… for free… is a very small group, almost as small as the amount of people who are willing to donate every month to a social network.
You can find mods of communities are usually fans of the communities they mod, it’s a topic they enjoy and so the incentive for them to invest their time is to keep their community clean and great. But running a social network which has hard costs not just time is a whole other thing
This is opposed to a regular website or social media network, where as it gets bigger, it makes more money through ads/subscriptions, the incentive is to get bigger to make more money
And then they can simply pay for the hard costs like hosting costs/bandwidth and people to do the shit no one wants to.
The reality for me is that the money has to come from somewhere, you can do a paywall like newspapers do or beg for donations every page visit like the guardian/wikipedia do, or the usual suspect allow advertising, but the money has to come from somewhere.
Thus the fediverse has a disincentive to growing larger, it is simply easier and more sustainable to remain small
they will have to enshittify to stay afloat, like allowing ads into instances, thats the reality if they want to grow.
i was thinking you could do ads for people not signed in, then no ads for people logged in
then for people logged in/signed up you could do discord style nitro benefits, fancy name tag, just extra stuff that supporters can get to show their support for the place
but in isolation no good because what’s to stop another instance just giving it away all for free? it’s like the place is self undermining, it’s the most cut throat environment to be in while being worse to work for than any it slave pen, at least at the end of the work week you get paid, here you’d be expected to work for free :\
The reason is easy: one likes the fediverse, wants to contribute for it and wants to enabled people to use it even if they can’t afford to pay for it.
On a smaller scale, that’s not much of a problem. I’m glad I can host for some people who don’t have money at all. Some of the others donate and some don’t and that’s fine as well.
@jerry@infosec.exchange , I’m sorry to bother but is it really true? Are you paying almost $5000/month out of your own pocket?
If true, why? This is not sustainable. Don’t you think that by letting so many people free ride on your generosity, you end up hurting yourself and the possibility of cottage-industry of professional hosting providers?
@rglullis @blenderdumbass I have donations from members that cover the costs.
Thank you for chiming in, Jerry!
Great interview, I only watched a part of it, but it was very interesting and refreshing to see your perspective on things. Thank you!
Ok, so you are not taking anything out of pocket at all? That’s better than most, I suppose.
Still, during the interview you touch on the subject of how the donation model is not sustainable and it can only works at the scale that Fedi is right now. Wouldn’t you consider then switching to a different model?
@rglullis I think the donation model is working ok at this scale, but I don’t believe it will scale up to the hypothetical future we were discussing on the show where the fediverse became the social media platform for the masses. There are somewhere around 1 to 2 million active fediverse users, depending on how you count. If that were 100x or 1000x larger, we would simply crumble - I don’t think the general architecture scales that well (think of all the duplicate storage that we end up paying for across various instance) and generally, people who use social media are far less concerned with the core value propositions of the fediverse, like privacy and whatnot. I know that’s hard to accept, but we’re here because that’s how we think. So no, I don’t think we will have a future where a 500,000,000 active user fediverse can be operated off of donations from members. I also very much doubt that people would pay a fee to be here when corporate social media alternatives are “free” to them
I agree with pretty much everything you are saying, but I disagree on the solution. I think that us insisting on the donation model is putting an artificial limit on further growth. It “works” for this 1M-2M MAU, but these numbers are not enough to attract other players and who might be willing to try different approaches.
I think we need to change the general mindset that we “need” the donation model to keep the people around, and flip to a system where every user is expected to pay a little bit. And yeah, you might argue that not everyone is able to afford it, but it would easier to come with systems where not-paying is the exception instead of the rule. We can have a system where every N paying subscribers guarantee one free spot, with N=2, 3, 5, 10, up to the admin. We can have a system (like I have in Communick) where customers can buy “multiple seats” and invite whoever they want. Alternatively, we can set up a Caffe sospeso system where donations are still accepted, but accounted directly for someone who wants to claim it.
I don’t think the general architecture scales that well (think of all the duplicate storage …
That’s my hunch too, although haven’t studied in detail - so I wonder how we can fix it ?
Is there an forum that discusses this scaling issue (in general, across fediverse) ?I suppose this community is as good as any. But it’s difficult to talk in general about this as each fediverse app has different performance needs/characteristics, so I’m not sure if you can extrapolate anything in general. But perhaps?
Thank you!
Why shouldn’t the donation model keep working? Wikipedia works on donations, why can’t the fediverse?
Wikipedia had big donors who can donate hundred thousands of dollars and even millions
I think “hundreds of thousands and even millions” is a bit of a stretch. Wikimedia’s annual report mentions donors at a level of “$50,000+”, and I’m guessing most of those are probably closer to 50,000 than to 100,000. Tbf I suppose that’s over just one year, so perhaps your statement isn’t entirely inaccurate.
I wonder why it needs so much money for infra? Last time I rented a VPS it was €7/month for 8 Core Xeon E5 V4, 12 GB DDR4 RAM, 150 GB SSD/NVME, Unlimited Traffic, 1 Gbps Port.
Storage. In the video he says that backups alone costs $500/month.
Also, given that the instance is called “infosec.exchange”, you can be sure that he is not running this on some cheap VPS.
Maybe the problem is that they are using ridiculously overpriced enterprise services like AWS or Azure, which provide their own solutions for a lot of common things like backups, replicas, logging, etc, but cost 100x more than what you can get with DIY on some cheap VPS if you’re fine with spending 1.25x more time.
Also, given that the instance is called “infosec.exchange”, you can be sure that he is not running this on some cheap VPS.
Why not, though.
Why not, though.
because cheap VPS will not give you enough bandwidth, or they oversubscribe their datacenters and their advertised speeds are far from real, or they have terrible support and if something goes down you are going to have a hard time to bring things up while having to explain to 10-15k people why things stopped working, or because the reason they manage to get such low prices is because they are selling user data on the side…
I’m not saying that the only correct alternative is to go to the big cloud providers, but there is a reason why “cheap” is not the sole criteria to choose a service provider.
Yes, the cheapest ones might have some risks, I mostly presented it as an example of what the opposite extremity looks like. There is a lot in-between, something a bit more expensive is even more guaranteed win. For example last time I used Hetzner, I had a server with 64gb RAM, 2TB SSD, and 16 cores Ryzen for something like €34/month. Hetzner support is very decent and they’re very well known, have decent reputation and been providing their services for a long time.
I’m currently watching the interview (quite interesting, to be honest, funny to watch an interview about Fediverse services). Could you please share the timestamp when Jerry talks about finances and costs?
34 minute mark. It says in the blog post from OP.
Thanks
Just to keep the instance up and running he needs to spend up to $5000 a month, pretty much out of his pocket.
Wtf!?
Seems to be some misunderstanding somewhere - Jerry states elsewhere that the costs are covered by donations.
The Mastodon instance I’m on has around 200 people (not all of them active), and received around €800 in donations last year,. Total costs were less than €300.
I think the problem of scaling kicks in when we go after demographics that are less charitable on average.
I’m one of them 🖤
I just watched the section of the interview where Jerry (admin of fedia.io and infosec.exchange), and he said that
There are a lot of people who aren’t that lucky. Even charging a 1$ fee is too much. That is their lifeline, it’s their way to connect to friends, and search for jobs. To me, I don’t think it’s appropriate to gatekeep it with a monthly fee.
https://video.firesidefedi.live/w/1yNa4rLzzLXnuRoX7Rny3y?start=38m45s
For the host question, it’s at 34:11
Hey all, Jerry here (from the interview). Happy to answer any questions.
No questions from my side, just a big thank you to mention Mbin, Lemmy, the Fediverse in that interview. It’s probably the first time for me where I watch a video talking about all of this, which is curious with how part of my daily life it is.
I still haven’t watched everything, but one of your quotes sounded resonated with me “We’re only here for a short time. Why should we be a-holes to each other, and not just try to enjoy ourselves?”
Anyway, thank you for everything, take care!
i know most of ao3’s budget goes to server costs. they get by with volunteer labor and donations, but they mostly host text. i genuinely have no idea what a sustainable model would look like for the fediverse, that doesn’t just treat volunteers like disposable rags we toss when they get inevitable burnout.
Why the fuck should we be paying admins to have control over our data and be able to arbitrarily ban us because they feel like it?
No. Their reward for having users is that they’re in control. Expecting users to then pay them for that control is fucking stupid, but I don’t expect most people to realize it.
thats because its thier site, instance they get set rules like it. just like reddit bans you force certain things. dont use the site then.
No. Their reward for having users is that they’re in control. Expecting users to then pay them for that control is fucking stupid,
You DO realize that not everyone works to attain power over other people, right?
but I don’t expect most people to realize it.
The reason people don’t realize that site owners’ reward for forking over half a salary in hosting costs for some nebulous power to hold other people in their clutching fists and cackle maniacally is because that’s not the motivator here.
I look forward to when you can see that.
Bro, why do you just trust these people when they tell you what their expenses are?
Even if some dumbass is spending $5000/month (which sounds like a load of bullshit if you’re not a moron) to host a fucking lemmy instance, why do you trust that they need to spend that money in order to provide the instance?
Have you noticed how most people buy things they don’t need just because they can? If not, then you need more life experience and it makes sense that you would take admin’s word at face value when they try to sucker you out of money.
As always, when money is involved scumbags and useful idiots come out in droves to justify each other’s existence.
You don’t sound like a very pleasant person to try and have a constructive conversation with.
I’m not sorry. Money brings out the worst in people and they need to be held accountable.
You can always ignore me.
What is “our data” in the case of Lemmy. Specifically.
Fuck you :)
Expected response from useful idiots.
Bro, what fucking project ever solves “the money problem?”
As soon as they get more, they spend more and then it’s back to square one.
And if he will ask people to pay to use it, they will, rightfully so, switch to a different instance.
I joined my instance’s patreon and donate $1 / month. I know it is not a lot, but so far the admin says he is doing fine on cash flow, should that change I will up my donation if able.
He missed a bit:
they will, rightfully so, switch to a different instance … or go somewhere else
