Eight years ago Lance Ulanoff had a problem. William
Shatner could not find him on Mastodon.
His distress is understandable, relatable even. Who wouldn’t want to
be found by Captain Kirk himself! The
Well, there was a way to say “Mastodon isn’t a viable mass market Twitter replacement and it wouldn’t become that without significant changes.” It’s literally that.
It is also pretty noticeably different than saying “Mastodon won’t survive.”
Not only that, by Ulanoff also compares Mastodon to a social network that did in fact “poof out into thin air”, Peach.
You may of course do all sorts of gymnastics when interpreting his piece, but I take what he said at face value. And the fact that he responded to my thread on fedi and admitted he was wrong (kudos for doing that, by the way!) seems to confirm my face-value reading was closer to his intended message when the piece was published.
I’m not referring to Ulanoff specifically, but come on, let’s not be disingenuous, you (I assume it’s you, correct me if I’m wrong) using him as an avatar of the criticism Masto was getting at the time. He made a maximalist prediction and was wrong, so he’s a convenient target to act as a dismissal of the genuine concerns being raised in general when Masto got into the mainstream’s focus.
Notably, he wasn’t entirely incorrect. Thousands of people did move on. I did. I’m not writing this on Masto. Did Ulanoff miss the fairly obvious point that with no centralized infrastructure Masto is actually more viable when it’s small than when it’s large? Sure. Was he right to claim that it was “less Snapchat than Path”? Sure. Arguably whoever remains at Masto is perfectly fine with that, and that’s cool, but at the time the debate was whether Twitter would be replaced by Masto, and that did not happen and will not happen, in no small part for the reasons more sharp-eyed critics than Ulanoff pointed out at the time.
It’s a bit of a tangent, but to interject my own take I’ll say that Masto isn’t even on my top 3 for AP applications. Twitter is just not the right format for the way AP works, Masto is not a good implementation of Twitter and some of the technical shortcomings Masto users keep insisting don’t matter actually do matter.
Again, as I wrote in my blogpost, one of the problems was that Ulanoff conflated fedi and Mastodon. You are not writing this on Mastodon, but you are writing this on fedi. This is something that Ulanoff missed completely.
Anyway, as I said, you are welcome to interpret stuff anyway you like. To me, his piece was just hilariously lazy, conventional to an almost self-parody level “tech journalism”, and that’s what I call him out on in my blogpost.
I am not saying Mastodon-the-software-project has no issues, I am not saying fedi has no issues – I talk about those issues in other places at length. But “Shatner could not find me and ‘toot’ sounds silly therefore this network will not survive” is a take that needs to be pointed at and laughed at when it comes from someone so high up on the tech journalism ladder.
I guess I read it as a general indictment on Masto doomsayers because… well, the take may deserve a response, but singling it out almost a decade after the fact seems weirdly specific. Notably, he was himself responding to a piece in the same medium titled “Bye, Twitter. All the cool kids are migrating to Mastodon (And the big-name brands are following closely behind)”, which proved to be just as incorrect.
That’s a long time and a narrow view to hold a gotcha on some random tech journalist. Lots of hot takes to get mad about in that space, particularly in the late 2010s. I mean, this piece came out when the conversation around this wasn’t even about people fleeing the increasingly decomposing post-Musk corpse of Twitter. The version of Masto he was writing about and its interoperability wasn’t even that obvious. You made me look it up. Masto wasn’t even using ActivityPub at the time, apparently. There were hotter takes much later, and it seems reasonable to interpret you going over an early one as a proxy of the whole debate.
Well, there was a way to say “Mastodon isn’t a viable mass market Twitter replacement and it wouldn’t become that without significant changes.” It’s literally that.
It is also pretty noticeably different than saying “Mastodon won’t survive.”
Not only that, by Ulanoff also compares Mastodon to a social network that did in fact “poof out into thin air”, Peach.
You may of course do all sorts of gymnastics when interpreting his piece, but I take what he said at face value. And the fact that he responded to my thread on fedi and admitted he was wrong (kudos for doing that, by the way!) seems to confirm my face-value reading was closer to his intended message when the piece was published.
I’m not referring to Ulanoff specifically, but come on, let’s not be disingenuous, you (I assume it’s you, correct me if I’m wrong) using him as an avatar of the criticism Masto was getting at the time. He made a maximalist prediction and was wrong, so he’s a convenient target to act as a dismissal of the genuine concerns being raised in general when Masto got into the mainstream’s focus.
Notably, he wasn’t entirely incorrect. Thousands of people did move on. I did. I’m not writing this on Masto. Did Ulanoff miss the fairly obvious point that with no centralized infrastructure Masto is actually more viable when it’s small than when it’s large? Sure. Was he right to claim that it was “less Snapchat than Path”? Sure. Arguably whoever remains at Masto is perfectly fine with that, and that’s cool, but at the time the debate was whether Twitter would be replaced by Masto, and that did not happen and will not happen, in no small part for the reasons more sharp-eyed critics than Ulanoff pointed out at the time.
It’s a bit of a tangent, but to interject my own take I’ll say that Masto isn’t even on my top 3 for AP applications. Twitter is just not the right format for the way AP works, Masto is not a good implementation of Twitter and some of the technical shortcomings Masto users keep insisting don’t matter actually do matter.
Again, as I wrote in my blogpost, one of the problems was that Ulanoff conflated fedi and Mastodon. You are not writing this on Mastodon, but you are writing this on fedi. This is something that Ulanoff missed completely.
Anyway, as I said, you are welcome to interpret stuff anyway you like. To me, his piece was just hilariously lazy, conventional to an almost self-parody level “tech journalism”, and that’s what I call him out on in my blogpost.
I am not saying Mastodon-the-software-project has no issues, I am not saying fedi has no issues – I talk about those issues in other places at length. But “Shatner could not find me and ‘toot’ sounds silly therefore this network will not survive” is a take that needs to be pointed at and laughed at when it comes from someone so high up on the tech journalism ladder.
I guess I read it as a general indictment on Masto doomsayers because… well, the take may deserve a response, but singling it out almost a decade after the fact seems weirdly specific. Notably, he was himself responding to a piece in the same medium titled “Bye, Twitter. All the cool kids are migrating to Mastodon (And the big-name brands are following closely behind)”, which proved to be just as incorrect.
That’s a long time and a narrow view to hold a gotcha on some random tech journalist. Lots of hot takes to get mad about in that space, particularly in the late 2010s. I mean, this piece came out when the conversation around this wasn’t even about people fleeing the increasingly decomposing post-Musk corpse of Twitter. The version of Masto he was writing about and its interoperability wasn’t even that obvious. You made me look it up. Masto wasn’t even using ActivityPub at the time, apparently. There were hotter takes much later, and it seems reasonable to interpret you going over an early one as a proxy of the whole debate.