Imperfect

the exotics problem

Exotics?

I found Andrej describing tools like Mastodon as "exotic" in his post, Digital hygiene, apt. They work for lenient purposes with abundant resources and onboarded, tech-savvy users. However, for emergent or massively collaborative purposes, they can fall apart in more ways than one. Lacking critical mass, a seamless onboarding and user experience, or a free price tag in a largely free niche can spell doom for adoption.

Exotic examples

Streaming alternatives

Non-standard streaming devices, while they can be very hygienic, present multiple problems. Voluntary or involuntary incompatibility with services other people expect the device to have can turn heads. Even if you use an alternative frontend or third-party client as a replacement, you might be in for an interrogation. Sometimes, frontend or client performance degrades thanks to the first party taking the lead in cat-and-mouse game, adding insult to injury. Other times, people have no desire to jump over hoops like installing an app compatible with your casting solution. Leading haters of ads toward ad-free solutions feels like drawing blood from a stone. Hey, at least what gets said isn't sent directly to Amazon, as with anything within earshot of an Amazon Echo.

Messengers

My messenger situation hasn't changed since I asked about encrypted messenger persuasion:

Most contacts message me over SMS. Few use more private and secure encrypted messengers like Signal and SimpleX.

Whether I onboarded them or not, contacts neglected or dropped these apps without notice. Those that remain were onboarded before I even asked if they were registered for them. simplicity notes' leaning into '90s nostalgia (blog deleted) shows a related example of a collective reluctance and resistance to switch:

WhatsApp: I'd really like to swap it for Signal or even text messages, but it seems an impossible feat because so many friends/family members and even service providers favor WhatsApp communication.

Critical mass and the moat of convenience can make hygienic messaging feel near impossible.

The Fediverse

Looping back to Andrej's avoidance of Mastodon, Monocyte's my problem with fediverse outlines two main problems. First, lacking wanted communities besides programming and technology. Second, no way to refrain from tiring drama and politics. Less tech-savvy individuals may have more problems struggling to understand how federation-related mechanics work, let alone when they go wrong. Even smart people can encounter trouble trying to understand how decentralized and federated solutions ultimately work.

Importance in hindsight

Despite the immense nuance that digital privacy and security can have, most treat those as hobbies if that. They realize bad things can happen after they happen, but that's no guarantee of deprioritizing convenience in favor of hygiene. The kindest recommendations can be met with genuine blindness or disbelief. Although, the opposite reaction of ultimatums isn't the answer. What is?

Odd one out

Feeling like the odd one out can make things worse. In Belonging Feels Far Away, visionaryhussy describes a sentiment of "not fitting into majority rule", constantly adjusting and wondering where your preferences factor in. Pressure to join your group's hygiene or lack thereof can suck. So can the tension of suggesting that anyone accommodates you. "Why am I so special?" can wrack your mind. Worse cases arise like friends growing tired of jumping through hoops to reach you, opting for those more reachable instead. It makes me wonder, "Is it easier to make friends out of the privacy-conscious instead of vice versa?"

Diversify digital diets

If you double down in exotic solutions unscathed, I invite you to explain your process so peons like me can try replicating it.

Another solution that comes to mind is broadening your toolkit, even if that means losing some privacy or sovereignty like how Andrej chose Twitter over Mastodon. Although, if you already walk the trodden path and have resources to spare, I can see how it can be worthwhile to dabble in other paths too.

Building an online home somewhere is a great start. However, I suspect that the more homes one owns, the better off their privacy, security, and circumstances can be. Talking points like "one is none, two is one" attempt to prevent the danger of not having enough backups. Global and local events, from the Cohost shutdown to Vladimir's multiple lost Instagram accounts outlined in Why I'm starting to blog (and you probably should too), present cautionary tales against putting your eggs in one basket. Stronger redundancy, connections, or surface area can inspire wonders for your informational and relational ecosystems. Compromises can be okay for a practice best approached with nuance like digital hygiene.

You can have your private, hygienic, and sovereign solutions that benefit you in certain circumstances. You can have your public, leaky, and convenient solutions that benefit you in others. A best of both worlds approach might not maximize your digital hygiene as desired, but you may be able to satisfice through the synthesis.

If you have better solutions to the exotics problem, drop me a line.

Want to reach out? Connect with me however you prefer: