No matter how many times you ask me, I am not using Discord. There are too many reasons not to use Discord, in this video I go over a few.Website: https://br...
The problem with this, particularly as leftists, is that we’re left to choose alternatives to these communications platforms that have next to no user base. It’s like consistently voting for a party that is great in theory, but completely misses the mark in terms of being able to attract a large number of people. Most working class people don’t have the time/money/energy to delve into open-source alternatives to major platforms and go through the painstaking process of navigating their way through new software, as well as trying to convince people to join. Opsec is important, but I can’t help but note that it’s something that often privileged leftists obsess over, completely missing why most of us don’t take such extreme measures all the time.
There’s open-source software that’s very popular because the developers take time to understand what users want, what users don’t want, and how users tend to work. Instead, developers take time to create open-source software that works the way they (the developers) want, and not so much the way users want the software to work. There’s a lot of "they’ll learn to like it" attitude with open-source alternatives and it’s a huge reason why they don’t succeed.
Want people to use open-source software? Look at VLC, Firefox, and LibreOffice, and honestly ask yourself what they’re doing right in terms of successfully attracting a very large number of users. Then look at open-source software that sounds great in theory but just can’t seem to attract many users, and honestly ask yourself what about that software users find difficult to grasp.
Far too many people in the open-source community care about what people should like and not what people actually like. If these devs want to attract more people, they need to listen to what most users actually want and create a competing product that people actually find attractive. This IMO is one of the most difficult to swallow pills that a lot of developers are far too prideful and arrogant to understand.
I would generally suggest Matrix as the best alternative to Discord. Even poor working class people can easily figure out how to use it.
The popular FOSS projects you mentioned as success cases were obscure and little known for many years before going mainstream. Ask yourself if you remember when Firefox was called Phoenix.
Even poor working class people can easily figure out how to use it.
The problem isn’t whether poor, working class people can figure this stuff out. It’s whether they realistically will, and in the case of software like Matrix, particularly in its current state, it will not attract most working class people who introduced to it. Privileged people tend to have the time and resources to go through the inevitable troubleshooting that’s involved in switching primarily used software to something completely new, and far too often to these issues get downplayed (i.e. the “I installed Linux for my parents but they keep complaining” phase that many open-source enthusiasts go through)
The popular FOSS projects you mentioned as success cases were obscure and little known for many years before going mainstream. Ask yourself if you remember when Firefox was called Phoenix.
Firefox was called Phoenix for all of two years, and rapidly gained popularity after a great amount of time and effort was paid with respect to what users actually want and will use-- not what users can and should use, according to developers.
I think that the response in this discussions often boils down to “users CAN figure it out” demonstrates the exact problem I’m talking about, in that there’s a massive difference between when users can do, and what users will do. Fixating on the former and not the latter is a massive waste of time.
I have-- I found it to be a pain to setup and trying to get people to try it was ridiculously difficult. After I got it setup and sent the link to others to download, most people asked…
“What client do I download? Why are there so many?”
“Do I need to setup a server? What are all these options”
“Are [mutual friends] on here? No? Okay…”
“Does [popular community] have a server here? No? Okay…”
It’s what people actually want
I just can’t help but laugh at this statement. It’s not what most people want, and it’s a shame so many people refuse to try and understand why. I’m tired of hearing open-source advocates fawn over things like Linux or Matrix and act like the average user experience isn’t the biggest reason why a lot of open source software is so unpopular.
It reminds me of people who are bad at cooking because they don’t use enough salt, butter, sugar or spices, and they insist that one has to acquire a more refined palate to enjoy their bland food. It’s like vegans who actually know how to make good food (i.e. VLC, OBS, Libre Office) versus vegans who refuse to listen to feedback and keep serving up dishes that they think are amazing but most people think are mediocre.
The problem with this, particularly as leftists, is that we’re left to choose alternatives to these communications platforms that have next to no user base. It’s like consistently voting for a party that is great in theory, but completely misses the mark in terms of being able to attract a large number of people. Most working class people don’t have the time/money/energy to delve into open-source alternatives to major platforms and go through the painstaking process of navigating their way through new software, as well as trying to convince people to join. Opsec is important, but I can’t help but note that it’s something that often privileged leftists obsess over, completely missing why most of us don’t take such extreme measures all the time.
There’s open-source software that’s very popular because the developers take time to understand what users want, what users don’t want, and how users tend to work. Instead, developers take time to create open-source software that works the way they (the developers) want, and not so much the way users want the software to work. There’s a lot of "they’ll learn to like it" attitude with open-source alternatives and it’s a huge reason why they don’t succeed.
Want people to use open-source software? Look at VLC, Firefox, and LibreOffice, and honestly ask yourself what they’re doing right in terms of successfully attracting a very large number of users. Then look at open-source software that sounds great in theory but just can’t seem to attract many users, and honestly ask yourself what about that software users find difficult to grasp.
Far too many people in the open-source community care about what people should like and not what people actually like. If these devs want to attract more people, they need to listen to what most users actually want and create a competing product that people actually find attractive. This IMO is one of the most difficult to swallow pills that a lot of developers are far too prideful and arrogant to understand.
I would generally suggest Matrix as the best alternative to Discord. Even poor working class people can easily figure out how to use it.
The popular FOSS projects you mentioned as success cases were obscure and little known for many years before going mainstream. Ask yourself if you remember when Firefox was called Phoenix.
The problem isn’t whether poor, working class people can figure this stuff out. It’s whether they realistically will, and in the case of software like Matrix, particularly in its current state, it will not attract most working class people who introduced to it. Privileged people tend to have the time and resources to go through the inevitable troubleshooting that’s involved in switching primarily used software to something completely new, and far too often to these issues get downplayed (i.e. the “I installed Linux for my parents but they keep complaining” phase that many open-source enthusiasts go through)
Firefox was called Phoenix for all of two years, and rapidly gained popularity after a great amount of time and effort was paid with respect to what users actually want and will use-- not what users can and should use, according to developers.
I think that the response in this discussions often boils down to “users CAN figure it out” demonstrates the exact problem I’m talking about, in that there’s a massive difference between when users can do, and what users will do. Fixating on the former and not the latter is a massive waste of time.
Have you even used Matrix? It’s everything you claim would make a good alternative to Discord. It’s what people actually want, it’s easier to use.
I have-- I found it to be a pain to setup and trying to get people to try it was ridiculously difficult. After I got it setup and sent the link to others to download, most people asked…
“What client do I download? Why are there so many?”
“Do I need to setup a server? What are all these options”
“Are [mutual friends] on here? No? Okay…”
“Does [popular community] have a server here? No? Okay…”
I just can’t help but laugh at this statement. It’s not what most people want, and it’s a shame so many people refuse to try and understand why. I’m tired of hearing open-source advocates fawn over things like Linux or Matrix and act like the average user experience isn’t the biggest reason why a lot of open source software is so unpopular.
It reminds me of people who are bad at cooking because they don’t use enough salt, butter, sugar or spices, and they insist that one has to acquire a more refined palate to enjoy their bland food. It’s like vegans who actually know how to make good food (i.e. VLC, OBS, Libre Office) versus vegans who refuse to listen to feedback and keep serving up dishes that they think are amazing but most people think are mediocre.
Bro what the…
Matrix has one client, Element, and one server matrix.org. It’s that simple
I like how you’re completely ignoring the many issues that most non-tech savvy people run into. Incredible.
Credible.