I’m really enjoying lemmy. I think we’ve got some growing pains in UI/UX and we’re missing some key features (like community migration and actual redundancy). But how are we going to collectively pay for this? I saw an (unverified) post that Reddit received 400M dollars from ads last year. Lemmy isn’t going to be free. Can someone with actual server experience chime in with some back of the napkin math on how expensive it would be if everyone migrated from Reddit?
You must log in or register to comment.
In all honesty, there are a ton of us tech enthusiasts who have no problem paying 10-20$ per month to run an instance out of our own pockets. We get the ability to subscribe to content we used to use Reddit for, and we can have a few folks hop on with us. Multiply that by a bunch, and add in community funded instances, and we’ll be fine.
Gotta consider server costs were only a fraction of Reddit’s costs. Salaries are quite pricey, and we have lots of folks volunteering time which will make it all work.
Don’t forget to make a donation to your instance if you love it. For most of us it’s a bit early but I give my 10 EUR per year to my Mastodon admin. Also, if you can choose instance ran by a non profit rather than a person as it ease the whole donation mechanism and give you the right to check where your membership due go.
Is there a list of non-profits that run an instance?
The distributed nature of Lemmy should make things more manageable. Personally, I’m running an instance on a dedicated machine I already pay for, so it’s not costing me anything unless storage skyrockets. Many other instance hosts are also hobbyists that don’t mind covering the costs, and may take some form of donations locally on their sidebars.
There probably should be a built-in feature for instance admins to enable a local donation button to contribute to their costs, though. While Lemmy is fairly resource-efficient, larger instances are eventually going to require pretty beefy VMs to keep up with the traffic, image uploads, etc. I could see some instances randomly vanishing when their owners can’t/don’t keep up with their bills (which would force users over to other instances), but ideally if any instance owners can’t afford to cover it, they hand control over to another community member to pick it up.
In general, Fedi admins simply close registrations when they can’t keep up with an influx of new users, and point people to other, smaller instances
This is pretty much my exact same situation as well, plus I get so few opportunities to “pay it forward” so to speak, and now is finally my chance to do so.
Wikipedia is the 7th most visited website in the world, more popular than Amazon, TikTok, even PornHub. It’s not funded by advertisers or other bullshit - rather through reader donations.
With that said, Wikipedia is still centralized content whereas Lemmy isn’t. Meaning there’s fewer expenses and pressure on any one instance or server to succeed. And if one instance or server doesn’t succeed, your access to the Federation is far from over.
Wikipedia is set up as a nonprofit. They have annual fundraising drives asking their users for money. They also have an endowment and receive grants.
A donation drive could be a good model but the decentralized nature of the platform would complicate things.
Wikipedia is set up as a nonprofit. They have annual fundraising drives asking their users for money. They also have an endowment and receive grants.
when you donate money, you’re not funding wikipedia’s operating costs. wikipedia itself is self sufficient. what you’re funding instead is the wikimedia foundation- which is set up to not receive grants but to give them.
the drives are misleading, to say the least
If it is not funded through user donations, how is it self sufficient? Genuinely curious.
Idk what he’s referring to, but wikimedia funds the operating costs of Wikipedia as well as the salaries etc of those that work to keep the site running.
They have been criticised for bloat, but the site itself is entirely dependent upon donations.
WP has a story that sums it up nicely: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/12/02/wikipedia-has-a-ton-of-money-so-why-is-it-begging-you-to-donate-yours/
Wish they would be more upfront about it. Wouldn’t have a problem donating to fund grants. But I want to know upfront.
I read on reddit that they have to do the drives in this way in order to amintsin some sort of charity or non profit status? Something along those lines. Like they have enough in the bank to be fine but they need to do this for some legal reason.
Forgive my half recollection of a reddit comment that could have been bs in the first place.
What happens to your account on a federated server if that one fails though?
As someone who burned reddit accts regularly this doesn’t really concern me. But if it really worries you couldn’t you set up your own private instance with you as the sole user? Nothing is more reliable than yourself. Even corporations with millions of dollars can close up shop at a moments notice.
Then you need a new account I think. It’s a limitation of the ActivityPub protocol I think (but I haven’t done any reading). Your identity is tied to the instance it was created on.
I think Lemmy, like Mastodon, will crumble if people don’t wrap their heads around federation. Mastodon stuggled because everyone just joined mastodon.social, not understanding that the server you join only affects your local timeline.
We need to teach people that you can join a small instance and still get 99% of the stuff you want from every other instance
Speaking as someone who totally doesn’t understand federation (but totally does get servers being overloaded) - I can completely see why they all joined what appears to be the primary instance. I did. I really struggled to work out which server to join and had to wade through a few that had their own special rules (eg “no creating communities here” - idr which one that was tho).
I ended up joining lemm.ee simply because it seems like a nice generic server set up to do general stuff with that wasn’t lemmy.ml. Is that a good choice? idk.
I had a similar problem grasping mastodon (actually the reason I didn’t really use it in the end).
Lemmy servers need to work more like Counterstrike or TF2 or WoW servers (edit: or IRC servers - that’s probably a better comparison tbh), where you might want to join a specific server with its own personality, but most people probably don’t care and are more interested in whether it performs well and is likely to be around a while. I also think some simple things like making the server less prominent in the UI and not making local communities the default view would help loads with people not feeling like they’re less because they’re not on the primary instance.
Edit: LMAO except I didn’t. I posted using the account I’d made on lemmy.ml but decided not to use. Lemmying is hard, yo.
I think the server needs to be prominent in the ui for now at least so people remember where to log in to
See: your edit lol
My local timeline is literally the whole reason I joined this particular instance. There isn’t enough traffic in the niche subs, so I find a popular instance with posts that tend towards my interests, instead.
@if_you_can_keep_it @Rogueren Assuming that one Federated Service is the end all be all user experience for what you’d like to share can hurt many. In Mastodon I kept seeing people (during the Twitter Exodus) who wanted multi-sever posting to each local feed under one account. Like Lemmy’s cross site posts, not sure if Lemmy lets you cross post multiple times to different communities. But some basically wanted Mastodon to work like Lemmy and FB Groups.
e.g. Main Post -> Community 1, Community 2
this works on the same principals as fidonet, UseNet, email, etc. These protocols are more like fundamental services. The idea behind these was that instead of running a bunch if proprietary garbage you would run things that support A LOT of standard protocols. Why? Because NO ONE should be allowed to own our communications but ourselves.
The corps did not build these networks, we did. Software will improve over time, OSS shows the way.
A small cloud server + a domain name costs less than a Netflix subscription. The developers have taken care to package lemmy in ways that are relatively straight forward to deploy, so a dedicated person with a small amount of experience can have an instance up and running in an evening. As long as a few percentage of users are willing to pay a netflix subscription to keep a server running, the financial burden would be spread.
I think this underestimates how users will naturally gravitate towards more centralized instances, or they’ll give up because the bigger instances are closed. Someone’s gotta pay for it, and it’s going to cost more than a Netflix subscription. Servers aren’t cheap.
This also ignores that the system isn’t horizontally scalable at all, so scaling up gets even more expensive
I think this underestimates how users will naturally gravitate towards more centralized instances, or they’ll give up because the bigger instances are closed.
(This is purely my personal opinion, of course!) In the scenario in which a few large instances dominate, the idea of the fediverse failed. One may estimate the likelyhood of success or failure given how they expect humans to behave, but in the end experiment beats theory. I think that for the fediverse to work a significant cultural shift has to occur, but I don’t think that it is an impossible shift. I would like the fediverse to succeed, and so I choose to take part in the experiment.
This also ignores that the system isn’t horizontally scalable at all, so scaling up gets even more expensive
Yes, that might cause some serious issues. The project is still in an early-development phase, and I don’t understand the technical aspects well enough yet to be able to identify whether there is obviously a fundamentally invincible barrier when it comes to scalability. My optimistic hope is that the developers are able to optimize horizontal scalability fast enough to meet the demand for scale. If it turns out to be impossible to scale, then only rich enough parties would be able to have viable instances, and that could be a reason for failure.
What does ‘horizontally scalable’ mean here? I haven’t come across that before.
This is what I think, but if anyone understands it differently please correct me.
Vertical scalability refers to scaling within a single instance. More users join and they post more content, increasing the amount of disk space needed to hold that memory, network bandwidth to handle many users downloading comments and images at once, and processing power.
Horizontal scaling refers to the lemmyverse growing because of the addition of new instances. The problem in this form of scaling is due to the resources that an instance has to use due to its interactions with other instances. So, you may create a small instance without a lot of users, but the instance might still need a lot of resources if it attempts to retrieve a lot of information (posts, comments, user information, etc) from the other larger instances. For example, at some point a community in lemmy.ml might be so popular that subscribing to that community from a small instance would be too much of a burden on the smaller instance because of the amount of memory required to save the constant stream of new posts. The horizontal scaling is a problem when the lemmyverse becomes so large that a machine with only a small amount of resources is no longer able to be part of the lemmyverse because its memory gets filled up in a few hours or days.
You can summarize by thinking of vertical scaling as “make machine bigger / more powerful” with horizontal scaling as “make more machines”.
I don’t believe this is how it works though.
Let’s say your tiny 3 person instance is connected to a big one. I believe it only pulls in content from the communities somebody from the small instance is subscribed too. Correct me if I’m wrong.
That’s what I’ve gathered, but I don’t believe there’s a way for instance owners to limit what’s fetched - a user crafts the query and the server does the needful.
I imagine this could amount to a denial of service attack of sorts, if some high-churn communities are imported into tiny instances. How bad that could be, I have no idea - I’m speaking pretty theoretically, here. Text is tiny, after all, so it’s probably not much of a concern, since most of the media is actually handled elsewhere…
I’m not a web developer. I’m sort of a sysadmin so i have some experiences maintaining machines for web apps for other people. And you are right…text will not create massive amounts of data. But a lot of tiny transactions can bring down machines surprisingly fast even if the total amount of data is relatively small.
I guess we are here to experience it first hand. I don’t think anybody…not even the developers have a clear idea of how well this will scale. There is only one way to find out lol
That’s what they’re saying.
Essentially - if someone from the small instance subscribes to a community that has a ton of data (huge post volume, images, whatever), the small instance needs to pull data over from the larger instance. At some point there may be communities that are so large small instances can’t pull them in without tanking.
maybe I phrased that poorly and you didn’t understand what I was trying to say. The size of the bigger instance shouldn’t matter at all because only data from communities is pulled, that a member of the smaller instance is subscribed to. So if the bigger instance has 1000 members or 2 million members wouldn’t make a difference. The only thing relevant should be how active the communities are that members are subscribed to.
Could that be solved by caching? Can’t the smaller instance avoid some duplication?
Some things can go faster if you add more workers, some things can only go faster if you make the workers bigger or faster .
If you’re tidying a garden you can get it all done more quickly, and tackle bigger gardens, by getting your friends to help. That’s horizontal scaling.
If you need to get a parcel from your house to Burkina Faso the only way to do that more quickly is to use a bigger, faster machine. That’s vertical scaling.
The way Lemmy is designed right now (says the op, I don’t know the detail) you can only support more users by making the server bigger and more expensive, not by using lots of smaller servers.
Edit: note that Lemmy as a whole scales horizontally: more instances == more users, but each instance has to scale vertically.
As everyone else has already said that’s a very good question, one that doesn’t necessarily have an answer, but Im not too concerned.
I’d point out (rather excitedly) that this really isn’t unlike how the Internet used to be up until the late 00s or very early 2010s and the rise of insta, FB, birdsite, digg and reddit. EVERYone had to shoulder hosting costs (unless you were on Geocities,Myspace then it was ads)
Yes, we’ve had bulletin boards and discussion forums since perl and CGI were a thing; each was self hosted at the hoster’s expense. Newsgroup and IRC servers too - THOSE all acted like “federated” instances - common newsgroups and chat channels would be synchronized and replicated from server to server EXACTLY how federated Lemmy/Kbin/etc. instances do it now.
And the infrastructure costs were a struggle then and they will be now. Back then to have a capable CGI forum host, or to colocate your server in someone’s data center it cost a lot - like decent hosting/co-loc plans started at $50/month and went up from there. Most hosting plans had steep bandwidth caps, think like 5GB included and +$5 per GB - if you hosted a popular site 40-50GB of traffic wasn’t abnormal. If you ran a newsgroup server you frequently had to futz with how long newsgroup msgs were retained to save disk space; like 48 hrs or less (then the data would be purged).
What you can get for $50/month THESE days is quite a lot more capable, and you can run a low retention instance for a lot less. Bandwidth and disk space are ludicrously cheap (at least compared to 10-15+ yrs ago). If your instance is low user, low community, and reasonable data retention/cloning, you could run Lemmy or a Mastodon or Calkey server on an old computer you have kicking around and host it from your home internet connection with a dynamic DNS mapping.
Obviously the big instances with gobs of users will struggle with how they pay for the server infrastructure - some will use crowdfunding, patrons, donations etc. Others will run ads, or subscriptions.
My home instance lemmy.ca is at 1400 users (as of right now) and is on a $25-30/month hosting plan and so far the site is doing just fine (or seems to be). I’d guess that a massive instance like lemmy.ml might be north of $1-200. But, if you think about it, all you need are 20 ppl to donate $10/month. I donate yearly to Wikipedia. As they discuss in this thread here https://lemmy.ca/post/599590 Mastodon gets $28k Euros a month in donations and pays for two? full time developers, so its not like there aren’t people donating to open source projects… and so far Fediverse servers are doing fine.
Do you happen to know what service that’s with? Trying to see what resources that takes. ($25-$30 can mean very different specs depending on where it is hosted). Ty.
Dunno. Hey @smorks@smorks@lemmy.ca , what is lemmy.ca’s host provider/plan (unless its top secret Canadian Moose Power Secrets)?
Reddit has over 2,000 employees most of whom are doing bullshit nobody using the site actually needs or wants, it’s possible to run a lot leaner than that. Like Reddit itself used to, before they started burning hundreds of millions trying to compete with every other social media site at once instead of being Reddit
bullshit nobody using the site actually needs or wants
Like being CEO.
Basically, volunteer code commits, volunteer admins, and donations for hosting costs.
Fosstodon is a pretty great example. It’s a fairly large mastodon instance which makes enough in donation revenue to pass some on to other open source projects. It’s not heaps ($600 in 2021), but I think it demonstrates that donations are a viable funding model. If things got tight I expect the community would meet the challenge.
It’s not like you need to build a custom data centre - it’s just renting a server, maybe even a VPS.
That said, of course the admins and mods are volunteers. I’d like to imagine that one day a few lemmy instances could charge a subscription fee for a premium, well managed experience.
Yeah exactly. If my instance stickies a post asking for donations, I’d throw them a couple bucks. No doubt
The thing is, Lemmy is decentralized. You don’t need to have an account on an instance (server) to use that instance’s “subreddits” (communities) - instances communicate their activity to each other automatically, so any instance will do (provided the instances haven’t banned each other). It’s just like email.
So it’s pretty simple to just stop accepting sign-ups once an instance starts to become impractically large. Anyone can start an instance for just the cost of a domain ($10ish/year, or free if it’s a subdomain of an existing website) and a server (that random computer you already have lying around will do just fine, for free). And a small instance can do fine on just donations and the good will of the operator.
Apropos of nothing, where are you finding domains for $10/year?
Check tld-list.com for price comparisons of different domain providers.
I was able to get a .win domain for $4.16 yearly on cloudflare. Cloudflare seems to have some pretty cheap domains.
I think the biggest cost will be image/video storage. The text takes very little space in today’s standards. The good thing is that symmetric fibre internet connections are becoming more common so it may be possible for members of the instance to contribute unused disk space to help with its image/video storage. This plus limiting the image/video sizes (and maybe forbidding video uploads altogether) will allow the instances to scale with user count.
I signed up for the lemmy.ml Patreon and am happy to support an open, federated site like this. I’d never pay for Reddit Gold, Twitter Blue, Discord Nitro, or any of those other nasty pay-to-win commericalized things but I’ll pay to keep an open platform from implementing stupid “premium” bullshit.
sell checkmarks like Tumbler.
for x$ a month get a checkmark next to your name on posts. in whatever colours you pay for. buy checkmarks for others.
What would the checkmark mean?
Just that you support the lemmy community.
As paradoxical as it is, I think that these open source non-profit projects are a lot more efficient than profit-driven, debt-fueled corporations.
First of all, the main contributors to a FOSS project do it for passion and do not take a salary.
Secondly, they don’t have the infinite growth mindset that pushes enterpreneurs to to spend as much as possible for maximum growth, all financed by a growing amount of investors (and debt, which costs interest fees).
If a FOSS project reaches maximum capacity, they will close subscriptions, they will throttle traffic, i.e. they will slow down growth, but they will not go into debt. Slowing down growth is something that a for-profit company would never do (at least until the interest rates were low and the investors were plenty, today idk). Eventually someone else in the community will decide to do a generous donation or open their own instance.
I don’t get it. Why would you call that more efficient? In your example a profit driven company will grow at a higher rate than a FOSS project right ? So in what way is it more efficient?
Yeah your issue is youre looking it from the perspective of a cancer cell. Growth isnt always good. Too much growth and you run out of resources. Keeping things sustainable and self sufficient and not reliant on loans and “infinite growth” ponzi economics tends to work better in the long run. (Example: libraries)
