zlacker

Well, it's a FOSS self-hostable server program. Mastodon isn't a service, so it's not susceptible to enshittification per se. A particular Mastodon host, sure. But Mastodon itself is just a codebase.

>>mod50a+(OP)
The biggest problem with Mastodon is that 3 instances comprise 50% of all traffic. That’s not that bad but that creates the conditions for the largest X instances to become Mastodon Inc., use VC money to fund advertising for their site and fund improvements the other instances don’t get, eventually defederate from the other instances, and finally enshittify. I think Mastodon is a bit more insulated from this than fully private companies, but it’s not invulnerable while that many users are on the biggest instances.

>>mod50a+(OP)
Make no mistake though, enshittification follows the population. Mastodon is about as protected as html in that sense. Could you build a nice lean mean performant static site in html? Of course, but hardly anyone does that. Most popular sites that you are able to discover these days are enshittified because the incentives favor that.

>>kjkjad+o3
> Mastodon is about as protected as html in that sense.

I think you're probably using the term "enshittify" differently than the parent comment. Enshittification, at least as I tend to see it used, doesn't really follow from a particular technology stack, but more about how an organization itself approaches its end users, particularly against over-exploitation/monetization of a given platform. It typically doesn't speak to the underlying technology (i.e. html vs. MB of Javascript vs. WASM), since that is (within reason) somewhat orthogonal to how the organizations running instances treat their users/how end users actually experience the platform.