• caseyweederman@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Not for AI-generated JPEGs and YouTube ads, sure.
      For organizing and communicating what actually matters? It’s plenty.

      • DudeImMacGyver@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 hours ago

        It can do useful things, certainly, but it’s easy for people to misunderstand what it actually is and does. It’s closer in function to texting than it is the web.

        • BenjiRenji@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Texting to whom, though, no? Especially online communication suffers from the people you want to communicate to not being on the platform. And since people organize in loose clusters you need to convince a majority of your cluster to adopt the platform. This is especially difficult when there are more popular alternatives that are not interoperable with others.

          Mesh networks are potentially better because they are more resilient and don’t lock you into inoperability with other systems. But before this resilience is tested, how do you demonstrate the upside? Especially mesh networks require nodes in proximity.

          Functions could be extended and you could provide services over the mesh using automatic messaging (all with reasonable respect for the available bandwidth). But more complex services require reliability. Isn’t this why it lacks adoption?