Dana Blankenhorn

Twitter to Mastodon

Over the last months I’ve been spending a lot less time on Twitter, now called X, and more time on Mastodon, its open source doppelganger.

The difference between the two can be summed up in two words. No algorithm.

When you use Twitter, or any commercial social media site, an algorithm encourages you to stay online. You like fluffy bunnies? Here are posts on fluffy bunnies. You can quickly fall into a fluffy bunny rabbit hole, where fluffy bunnies are all that matters, and anyone who doesn’t like fluffy bunnies is some sick pervert. This is especially true on TikTok.

At Twitter, this is found under the tab marked “for you.” The tab doesn’t exist in Mastodon. Instead, there are other tabs. “Home” is like Twitter’s “following” tab. Federated shows the most recent posts on any site, no matter where they come from. You can input a hashtag to get news on any topic of interest, like #Ukraine. There’s also a local tab featuring messages placed on Mastodon server you are part of.

This last is important. There is no central control in the “Fediverse,” which includes many other social services, including a Facebook clone and an Instagram clone. Instead, anyone can spin-up a server or “instance” and choose who to connect or “federate” with. In practice, while Meta’s “Threads” is compatible with Mastodon, many Mastodon servers won’t link to it, fearing the force of the algorithm, the coming firehose of content, or just Mark Zuckerberg’s right hook.

The First AI Crash

No technology trend goes straight up. There are always crashes along the way, as subsets of the trend fall behind, while others prove their worth.

This was true with the Internet. Search engine companies were falling even before Google was created. It’s why Wall Street wanted Yahoo to become a “portal.” (Wall Street knows nothing.)

This will be true for A.I. as well. It’s starting right now.

The “consumer side” will crash first. Things like ChatGPT were fun for a while, but the mass market is deciding it’s more like Pokemon Go than “the Google.”

For any technology to gain legs, it must prove its utility. It must create productivity. It must not only do things that weren’t available before, but it must make money doing it, and make doing other things easier.

Open Source is the Tortoise, Not the Hare

One reason reporters are slow to see the threat ActivityPub offers to Threads and Twitter is the nature of open source.

It moves slowly. It’s reactive.

Open source isn’t innovative, in the classic sense. You can have innovations in open source, but they’re in addition to something meant to emulate something else.

Given time, however, open source always wins.

My son and I still laugh over the 2009 CompuTex show in Taiwan, where I set out after “desktop Linux.” Finally found a few booths outside the main hall, and even met Jim Zemlin, head of the Linux Foundation, as he finished a speech to attendees.

Threads and Open Source

The Clouds were built with open source.

What’s now Meta Platforms got its start not with the “social network” of Facebook, but with the Open Compute Project. It’s an open source platform for building hyperscale data centers at minimal cost.

Thanks to Open Compute, Meta owns its own infrastructure. It also has thousands of programmers on staff, whose job it is to bring traffic to that infrastructure. But even with Threads, Meta didn’t forget where it came from.

Threads is being built to support ActivityPub, the open source system behind Mastodon and what’s called the Fediverse.

Each Mastodon server will shortly have a choice, whether to connect to or “federate” with Threads. Some will. Some won’t. If you don’t like the decision of your instance’s admin, you can choose another instance that meets your needs. Or you can set up your own.

In short, you don’t need Threads. Its only advantage is its scale since it will use Meta infrastructure. That’s also its disadvantage. It’s being built to collect data and monetize it. Mastodon isn’t.

The degree to which Cloud Czars like Meta and its four peers – Apple, Microsoft, Google, and Amazon – support the open source ethos they’re built on is always an open question. They will go back-and-forth on it, adding support here, withholding it there, based on their own business requirements.

Fall of Babel

The slow-motion collapse of Twitter leaves us all with a question.

Where do we go now?

Twitter was the Internet’s Tower of Babel. It was where everyone came to discuss everything. It wasn’t all about politics. There was finance Twitter, celebrity Twitter, and (perhaps my favorite) soccer Twitter. Companies no longer had to issue press releases. They’d just Tweet, and it would be heard by all those who wanted to listen.

Elon Musk didn’t destroy Twitter. Donald Trump did. As with everything in his life he trivialized it, made it all about him. He used it as a weapon, first against his own party, later against democracy.

Musk completed the process by engaging his own self-destructive tendencies. He has done tremendous damage to his own brand in the process but doesn’t care because his fortune has risen. This is thanks to Tesla, which is fulfilling the ambitions of its most bullish investors by scaling production of electric batteries and cars that use them.

The Wealth of AI

The battle over who gets what when productivity blossoms has been going on since the Renaissance made learning cheap 500 years ago. It accelerated with the Industrial Revolution, accelerated again with the Computer Age, and again with the Internet. It’s accelerating again.

The wealth of AI is the rocket fuel of Moore’s Law.

The late, great Gordon Moore was an engineer, who saw his theory as a self-limiting phenomenon. In various editions of my book on the subject I have tried to explain how this constant, exponential improvement works outward, from processors, to everything silicon touches.

Like software.

Software is still mostly written by hand. In the 20^th century productivity improved only in line with the tools used to write it. The 21^st century brought Moore’s Law to software. Once software goes online, in a managed cloud, it’s instantly accessible to everyone. All the barriers created over a century to cordon off markets disappear. Some can be rebuilt, but at an enormous cost to efficiency.

Open source is a big part of this new Moore’s Law of Software. The more hands on the code, the faster the code improves. Software communities mean everyone is building, together, on a constantly rising platform. There’s no more reinventing the wheel.

The Lesson of Buzzfeed

I have been out of Northwestern’s Medill School of Journalism for 45 years now, and the chief lesson I was taught there should still apply.

It came in my magazine business course. It was the only one I aced.

The lesson was simple. Know your reader.

Journalism is about organizing and advocating a place, an industry, or a lifestyle. You need to know who your target market is, organize that market, and represent its interests. That’s why newspaper publishers would go to chamber of commerce meetings. It’s why industry magazines organized trade shows. It’s why a publication’s mailing list was its key asset. Its why publishers exist, to sell, and why they stand above even editors on the masthead.

That 2002 Feeling

The last tech crash began in 2000 and I was in the center of it, a mid-career writer with a specialty called Internet Commerce.

That year saw denial and bargaining.

The next year saw anger and depression.

It was only in 2002 that acceptance came.

We know what followed. Talented programmers worked on open source projects and standards bodies created what became the Cloud. When proprietary advantage became worthless, and there seemed there was nothing to do, people worked together with technical goals in mind rather than just financial ones.

It was a slow build. In 2002 my gross income was zero dollars. In 2003 it was zero dollars. I got interested in what’s now the Machine Internet, which I christened the World of Always On, and in 2004 I finally made a few dollars. The next year I was asked to cover Open Source, and my career took off. For a time.

I’ve mentioned before how, in every photo of a stock market crash the people in it look similar. Similar age, similar backgrounds. They’re different people. Those who watched the 1987 crash were different from those who saw the 2000 crash, different from those who saw 2008, different from those who saw 2022.

ChatGPT

Hate to rain on y’all’s parade but…ChatGPT is not the best thing since sliced bread. It’s not the Macintosh. It’s not the iPhone.

It’s software that translates search requests and results into what seems like plain English. Whether it’s useful depends on the input it gets. Garbage in, garbage out.

That doesn’t mean ChatGPT is Bitcoin or blockchain. It makes search accessible again. But it also makes search messy again. It creates imprecision in a world of 1s and 0s. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. Humans are imprecise. We’re messy. And it is fun to see computer output seem as imprecise and messy as we are.

It’s very easy to get a lie out of ChatGPT. Ask it about a subject where there are lots of lies on the Internet. They will appear in your answer. ChatGPT doesn’t have a filter. Yet.

Tech and its Workers

One of the biggest mistakes I made in my journalism career lay in assuming tech companies would have the back of their workers, because they depend on human talent rather than muscle. (The picture is from a book on computer coding.)

The tech oligarchs who made their piles in the last decade have become just like other oligarchs. No worse, but certainly no better.

The latest round of layoffs is especially egregious. It’s not how many were let go. They were mostly the pandemic overhang, an adjustment as life returns to “normal.” It’s how they were done, and who was targeted. Firing via e-mail? No warning for families or teams? It sends the message that people don’t matter.

To the oligarchs they don’t. Elon Musk, Marc Andreessen, Peter Thiel – they’re one-way guys. They care about themselves, no one else. They don’t really care about technology, or what it can do. All they care about is how much money it is making for them right now.

There was, once, a difference between Wall Street and Silicon Valley. The wealth creation of the last decade eliminated the difference. Wall Street doesn’t care about the long-term, about the need to keep investing in the new across the chasm of a recession, or the talent that is tech’s raw material. It cares about this quarter, about today’s trade.

What’s funny is that the horrors now being visited on the Valley are 10 times worse on Wall Street. Layer after layer of management has been eliminated, as the industry has gone online. More and more of its wealth is in fewer and fewer hands, and those hands care nothing about the people who made the wealth. Just as they don’t care about the technologists of the Valley.