by using a service, are you implicitly supporting it? i'm interested to hear what you think.
@hamblingreen Depends which service. A social network? No doubt, you're making it more valuable.
An operating system? A little - you're shifting the balance of power by not making the competitor seem relevant ("Nobody is using Linux anyway").
By using a system, you're supporting its importance. Social effects.
@dcz my views exactly. what about when it comes to platforms? for the sake of argument, let's say all my friends are using Element (the Matrix chat platform) to communicate, but i still mainly use facebook messanger to communicate with family, to what degree am i supporting element or matrix? i think that this depends on your definition of the word support. you might be supporting the platform or protocol with your time, but not with your sentiment. just trying to foster discussion
@hamblingreen @dcz I say "if you want to reach me, don't use facebook." There are (supposedly) a half-dozen messages I've missed over the last few months since logging in.
But it's nice to give people multiple alternatives: my family used email before escorting themselves into a walled garden, but sms is still pretty accessible.
@zachdecook then come along sms-like services that are better in many ways like matrix's e2ee messaging. do you think it's worth it to try and get them to switch to things like that? why or why not? i think that it's easier work with what they already use (like email or sms), i hate it when people tell me i need to sign up for this or that.
@hamblingreen I also hate that, because it means placing your trust in another fallible company. Using a decentralized network avoids this problem. XMPP, 'the standard protocol', is quite decentralized and easy to self-host. On the other hand MMS is also decentralized and people use it extensively. Personally navigating this myself. Knowing people have had success migrating smaller networks gives hope.
