What if we called instances providers?

I’m afraid that when I say „my Lemmy provider” people will think I’m referring to my drug dealer.

Lemmy and Molly (foss) are the most addictive. 🤣🤣
“Psst… Hey, you. Wanna buy some SoMe?”

Servers are a better word for it imo. It is what it actually is and average people already understand servers from discord

"Average people" don't even know what Discord is
Discord servers are just groups. Lemmy "instances" are actual separate instances of Lemmy communicating.
- I know. What im saying is the word server isnt too technical and is both easier to understand and technically correct

I was thinking the same. Provider is easier to understand, and used in daily life contexts.

I changed my Internet provider
This electricity provider offers better service

How would the word be used in our context? The Fediverse provider?

But I think I associate the word with money related activities and I'm not a fan of that.
- I would think the jargon would be "I chose fedia.io as my Lemmy provider," or similar for other federated platforms.
- "I recommend feddit.uk as a Lemmy provider for people living in the UK"
  
  "Feddit.org is a good provider for German speakers"
- I associate the word with money related activities
  
  That's a good thing. It costs money to provide services to people. The Fediverse is no different.
Yes, thats what I was thinking.

I was thinking about other decentralised networks people may use, and they all seem to use the word "provider":

Email provider

Internet provider

Usenet provider
- That's what resonates for me.
  
  We don't have email instances, and email providers similarly block un-desired content, but there's not a big fuss about missing out on specific types of spam. Lol.
  
  Similarly Internet service providers actually also block big blocks of malware providing domains, and accidentally sometimes block some great piracy resources. People who care learn to use a VPN or switch providers. Everyone else doesn't have to think about it.
  
  I'll argue that The Fediverse also carries extremely similar switching cost as an email or Internet provider. For an average user, "Let folks you care to inform know where you moved, and maybe copy over some favorite bookmarks."
  
  Sure, different providers do try to bring different lenses on the same federated content, but most people aren't served well by thinking about it on day one.
  
  I think shifting to the term provider is a lot more honest to the user about what to expect.
Provider has the connotation of being a paid provider for services. While it’s a technically accurate analogy, I prefer the more abstract comparison of considering the fediverse a meeting place rather than a paid service since it’s a mostly volunteer and self hosted network compared to email.
- I disagree. Gmail is my email provider. I don't pay for it. (Yeah I know they are taking ad revenue.)
  
  Instance is unnecessary jargon.
- Indeed, but unfortunately there's no word for a volunteer provider as far as I know.

As a term, 'instance' is already baked into code, databases, and APIs.

If I wanted to use an API to block 'lemmy.world', for example, I'd call 'site/block' with the relevant 'instance_id'. That's already 2 different terms for the same thing ('site' and 'instance'), which isn't great, but adding 'provider' into the mix means you're now saying "if you want to block a 'provider', use the 'site' endpoint with the ID for the 'instance'", which is arguably worse.

I like server better

People can perfectly understand terms like instance or server...if they are explained to them.

They are also accustomed to concepts like social media and social network that can also be used to explain the Fediverse. Each server is its own social media platforms interacting with eachother through a distributed social network.

But, I actually think the Fediverse require an intermediate point between social media and social network, or something above it.

If the Fediverse (including in this case all decentralised protocols like ActivityPub, Zot/Nomad, Diaspora, Ostatus, AT Proto, etc) is a Social network and each particular instance it's own social media platforms that interact within the network, the software they run and the community they form part of within the wider fediverse is an intermediate stage between social medium and social network.
Now, if each server/instance are social media platforms and the software they run are the social network; the protocol or protocol they use is/are a network of networks and the Fediverse a network of networks of networks of social media platforms.

I agree, let's make it more friendly to people wanting to start a fediverse provider as a business so a big company can't come in and gobble up everyone

Call them States ... like states within a federation.

I just say server hosts

That's fantastic. Provider avoids the mostly baseless FOMO (fear of missing out) that instance can invoke.

I think provider more clearly communicates that the majority of the desirable content is going to be available the same through any provider.

Sure, go ahead. Technically it's not 100% correct. I mean lemm.ee wouldn't be your provider, it'd be the people operating the server who provide the service to you... But I think it's close enough. Only issue I can see is the term "provider" usually being used with commercial services. Like a cellphone provider or ISP. So I'm not sure if people start to think this costs $10 a month or something and is run by for-profit businesses... But we also use the word "provider" for free things, so I'm not entirely sure about that. But generally speaking I think we use different terminology because we don't think of the Fediverse as a product.