• Avid Amoeba
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Wikipedia managed to do it on donations only. Federated social media is similar in many ways and I think it’s entirely possible that we may get development and hosting to be funded in a similar fashion.

      • Avid Amoeba
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        I think the lesson that should be beginning to crystallise in people’s minds these days is that we have to pay. If we don’t, we get Facebook, Digg, Reddit, etc. We get inevitable enshitification. I mentioned Wikipedia because I think paying for it has sunk into many people’s minds already. And generally we don’t need everyone to pay. If the ones that can afford to spare a few bucks a month, do, it’ll be enough.

        • Wiz@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          What are you referring to “looking like Reddit”? And why would you want their API lock-in, paid ads disguised as content, and obvious AI bot posts?

    • Brkdncr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      9 months ago

      Wikipedia is different. It’s a lot more static to begin with.

      You need a whale to keep this thing afloat, and if you get a whale, you also have to bend the knee.

      I’d rather see some ads and reasonable employee compensation than relying on a wealthy benefactor.