It would tie in better with the email analogy, and it could show that they all just provide access to the same network.

What do you think?

  • Palladiumasteroid@piefed.socialEnglish
    0·
    2 days ago

    People can perfectly understand terms like instance or server…if they are explained to them.

    They are also accustomed to concepts like social media and social network that can also be used to explain the Fediverse. Each server is its own social media platforms interacting with eachother through a distributed social network.

    But, I actually think the Fediverse require an intermediate point between social media and social network, or something above it.

    If the Fediverse (including in this case all decentralised protocols like ActivityPub, Zot/Nomad, Diaspora, Ostatus, AT Proto, etc) is a Social network and each particular instance it’s own social media platforms that interact within the network, the software they run and the community they form part of within the wider fediverse is an intermediate stage between social medium and social network.
    Now, if each server/instance are social media platforms and the software they run are the social network; the protocol or protocol they use is/are a network of networks and the Fediverse a network of networks of networks of social media platforms.

  • freamon@preferred.socialEnglish
    0·
    2 days ago

    As a term, ‘instance’ is already baked into code, databases, and APIs.

    If I wanted to use an API to block ‘lemmy.world’, for example, I’d call ‘site/block’ with the relevant ‘instance_id’. That’s already 2 different terms for the same thing (‘site’ and ‘instance’), which isn’t great, but adding ‘provider’ into the mix means you’re now saying “if you want to block a ‘provider’, use the ‘site’ endpoint with the ID for the ‘instance’”, which is arguably worse.

  • XNX@slrpnk.netEnglish
    0·
    2 days ago

    Servers are a better word for it imo. It is what it actually is and average people already understand servers from discord

  • hendrik@palaver.p3x.deEnglish
    0·
    2 days ago

    Sure, go ahead. Technically it’s not 100% correct. I mean lemm.ee wouldn’t be your provider, it’d be the people operating the server who provide the service to you… But I think it’s close enough. Only issue I can see is the term “provider” usually being used with commercial services. Like a cellphone provider or ISP. So I’m not sure if people start to think this costs $10 a month or something and is run by for-profit businesses… But we also use the word “provider” for free things, so I’m not entirely sure about that.

  • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    2 days ago

    I like it. The reasoning’s good.

    I hate the term “instance”. It’s hopelessly geeky (it derives from object-oriented programming). It brings to mind nerds and gamers in basements.

  • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 🇮 @pawb.socialEnglish
    0·
    2 days ago

    I wouldn’t even mention anything about servers or how it works, since most anyone I would even tell about Lemmy won’t understand the technical details, nor would they care. It would only confuse them and push them away.

    Just hook them up with an instance they will fit into, and have them use the site. I really think that a lot of the other tech nerds here are overthinking it and trying to get non-tech minded people to switch by giving them technical details that do more harm and cause more confusion than simply having them use the site without knowing jack shit about it other than “it’s like Reddit but not shitty.”

    That’s really all you gotta tell most people; “it’s like Reddit (or Twitter if you’re trying to talk up Mastodon), but not shitty.”

    • irelephant [he/him]🍭@lemm.eeOPEnglish
      0·
      2 days ago

      Sure, but then questions like “why do these subreddits have an @ symbol?” happen, or the dreaded default “local” sort causes problems.

  • MajorHavoc@programming.devEnglish
    0·
    2 days ago

    That’s fantastic. Provider avoids the mostly baseless FOMO (fear of missing out) that instance can invoke.

    I think provider more clearly communicates that the majority of the desirable content is going to be available the same through any provider.

  • misk@sopuli.xyzEnglish
    0·
    2 days ago

    I’m afraid that when I say „my Lemmy provider” people will think I’m referring to my drug dealer.