Hot take: naming doesn’t matter.
-
Hot take: naming doesn’t matter. The term “fediverse” is goofy and nerdy *and fine, actually.*
You use the “Internet” every day. “Email” is ubiquitous. We install “apps” on “phones.” You ask for the “Wi-Fi password.” These are all goofy names, yet nobody bats an eye.
What we call something doesn’t factor into its adoption as much as nerds would have you think. But arguing about naming is easier than doing all of the *other* work required for adoption.
@cassidy I still think Wireless-Fidelity was a stupid name.
-
Hot take: naming doesn’t matter. The term “fediverse” is goofy and nerdy *and fine, actually.*
You use the “Internet” every day. “Email” is ubiquitous. We install “apps” on “phones.” You ask for the “Wi-Fi password.” These are all goofy names, yet nobody bats an eye.
What we call something doesn’t factor into its adoption as much as nerds would have you think. But arguing about naming is easier than doing all of the *other* work required for adoption.
@cassidy the reason behind calling WiFi WiFi is sooooo dumb. it didn't occur to me that it probably stood for something until recently and I wish I hadn't had that thought now
-
@cassidy I still think Wireless-Fidelity was a stupid name.
@cassidy Doesn't stop me from _using_ it, which was your point.
But I also think a lot of people call it "wireless" because it's a dumb name
-
This is also about the name “Flathub.” 😝
@cassidy Say Flathub, I think IKEA (Flatpack)
-
Hot take: naming doesn’t matter. The term “fediverse” is goofy and nerdy *and fine, actually.*
You use the “Internet” every day. “Email” is ubiquitous. We install “apps” on “phones.” You ask for the “Wi-Fi password.” These are all goofy names, yet nobody bats an eye.
What we call something doesn’t factor into its adoption as much as nerds would have you think. But arguing about naming is easier than doing all of the *other* work required for adoption.
@cassidy The decision made by GNU Project to name their image manipulation program after an ableist slur is awful though.
-
Hot take: naming doesn’t matter. The term “fediverse” is goofy and nerdy *and fine, actually.*
You use the “Internet” every day. “Email” is ubiquitous. We install “apps” on “phones.” You ask for the “Wi-Fi password.” These are all goofy names, yet nobody bats an eye.
What we call something doesn’t factor into its adoption as much as nerds would have you think. But arguing about naming is easier than doing all of the *other* work required for adoption.
@cassidy
"fediverse" is a great name.but there are some limits. with that opensource image editor, the name gets so much in the way that i just tell my friends to use inkscape. 😉
or certain ruby packages...
https://rubygems.org/gems/cocaine/versions/0.6.0 -
Hot take: naming doesn’t matter. The term “fediverse” is goofy and nerdy *and fine, actually.*
You use the “Internet” every day. “Email” is ubiquitous. We install “apps” on “phones.” You ask for the “Wi-Fi password.” These are all goofy names, yet nobody bats an eye.
What we call something doesn’t factor into its adoption as much as nerds would have you think. But arguing about naming is easier than doing all of the *other* work required for adoption.
@cassidy
Bikeshedding is a hell of a drug -
Of course “doesn’t matter” is over generalizing (500 character limit here!). My point is that it matters a whole lot less than we want to admit. “Microsoft” is a hysterically terrible name. “Google” is such a nerdy in-joke. “Apple” is meaningless. “Facebook” is a bit on the nose.
What will matter more for the fediverse is not what it is called—it’s who people can connect with across what apps and sites that they enjoy using.
@cassidy as a former brand strategist I actually really like fediverse. It sounds like a universe in scope and a coalition in style. Which is basically accurate. And the mashup makes it fun. I agree that any name can get big but as names go this is a good one
-
Hot take: naming doesn’t matter. The term “fediverse” is goofy and nerdy *and fine, actually.*
You use the “Internet” every day. “Email” is ubiquitous. We install “apps” on “phones.” You ask for the “Wi-Fi password.” These are all goofy names, yet nobody bats an eye.
What we call something doesn’t factor into its adoption as much as nerds would have you think. But arguing about naming is easier than doing all of the *other* work required for adoption.
@cassidy I take your broad point, but I think it's important to never forget how terrible an idea it is to call your Photoshop alternative 'Gimp'.
-
Hot take: naming doesn’t matter. The term “fediverse” is goofy and nerdy *and fine, actually.*
You use the “Internet” every day. “Email” is ubiquitous. We install “apps” on “phones.” You ask for the “Wi-Fi password.” These are all goofy names, yet nobody bats an eye.
What we call something doesn’t factor into its adoption as much as nerds would have you think. But arguing about naming is easier than doing all of the *other* work required for adoption.
@cassidy@mastodon.blaede.family I agree that there are more important work to be done pushing the adoption of fediverse, but names do matter and they matter a lot. Names are the first thing people get exposed to before even touching anything concrete about the product, and it's also what gets called everyday when the product is referred to. The initial exposure and subsequent reinforcement has much influence on people's perception and mental associations of the product, so it's wise to avoid negative and unwanted associations when choosing the name.
That said, I do believe the name "fediverse" is fine. Besides, it's unpratical to change the name considering the effort needed, and the fluctuations on the identity can have negative impacts. -
@cassidy@mastodon.blaede.family I agree that there are more important work to be done pushing the adoption of fediverse, but names do matter and they matter a lot. Names are the first thing people get exposed to before even touching anything concrete about the product, and it's also what gets called everyday when the product is referred to. The initial exposure and subsequent reinforcement has much influence on people's perception and mental associations of the product, so it's wise to avoid negative and unwanted associations when choosing the name.
That said, I do believe the name "fediverse" is fine. Besides, it's unpratical to change the name considering the effort needed, and the fluctuations on the identity can have negative impacts.@anon counter-point: the fediverse isn’t a product
Ciao! Sembra che tu sia interessato a questa conversazione, ma non hai ancora un account.
Stanco di dover scorrere gli stessi post a ogni visita? Quando registri un account, tornerai sempre esattamente dove eri rimasto e potrai scegliere di essere avvisato delle nuove risposte (tramite email o notifica push). Potrai anche salvare segnalibri e votare i post per mostrare il tuo apprezzamento agli altri membri della comunità.
Con il tuo contributo, questo post potrebbe essere ancora migliore 💗
Registrati Accedi