Graphs of the sizes of fediverse instances, how common they are, and where the most people are! π§΅
Data pulled from
https://instances.social/ (by
@TheKinrar) and excludes pawoo and baraag as they're heavily blocked for good reasons (it seems)
Breaking down instances by the number of users into bins (that are quasi human friendly logarithmic), we see that the majority (55%) have 2-50 users, ~33% have 1 user, and almost all instances have less than 5,000 users.
@fediversenews1/
This graph is a cumulative percentage of all users starting with the largest instance and descending. By 20th largest, we've got 50% of all users. Mastodon.social hosts ~16%! The top 10 get you ~40%. Note that this includes 2 large japanese instances (mstdn.jp+mastodon.cloud)
Well, turns out it's pretty even (using the bins from above), from 1K to 1M users, with 10% users in 1K-5K instances and ~13% in 50K-100K instances. Only below 1K user instances do you get a substantial drop off in the number of users on such instances.
Take away for me, plenty of people on 1K to 40K instances!
3/
We see that the halfway mark is ~50K users. So half of the fediverse are on instances with 50K or more users, half on instances with less.
Slightly more technically, this line is pretty straight (as users are roughly evenly spread out, highlighted above). Given that the bins are roughly logarithmic-ish, this hints that the distribution is a power law.
end/
All I'll say is that on the log-log plot there was small but clear bulge in the mid-sized instance range (1K-100K users), which may represent a certain "sweet spot" of instance size that people are attracted to ??
Interesting data. Question for me is how user experience matches to size of instance. I. E. Where is the most enjoyable / rewarding home in the Fediverse? π€·ββοΈ
The secret might be that people vary in what they want and are looking for, thus the distribution we've got where any user is as likely to be on a large instance as they are to be on a small instance.
Yep, I take your point and I think you are right! See, eg, my extra post here: https://hachyderm.io/@maegul/110331536984068521 where I comment on how the data might indicate that people are indeed gravitating to instances in the size range you highlight.
So maybe the 40K-50K bin is just a kink, but yea, maybe you're totally right, and it's a valley between two kinds of users/instances.
Cities and their populations probably demonstrate a similar pattern??
maegul
2023-05-08 06:00:49
Some servers are also open to growing and others are not - scaling moderation is an issue here for some
So some users in a server of a particular size were in a smaller server when they first joined so what we see now may not fully reflect initial user choice.
#Mastodon #MastodonServer #MastodonSocial #MastodonDesign
and for the big instances. how active are the users? If i look at my server stats is see that have the third active one
Yes thatβs also relevant. Iβm unclear on the data I got in activity and how it compared to that in fedidb. So I didnβt do any analysis on that. Maybe a bother time or someone else would be keen.
What are those activity numbers? Peak users? Median, modal, mean average?
Either way. Shockingly low to see 4 digits there.
is the data i see from my admin site, can not point the vinger on it look on other servers. En what active means
While >40K instance users found the βmega-instancesβ unwieldy, too much like corporate SM, &/or unresponsive to legit concerns; but still wanted the SM experience of a well populated instance.
*based on no specific knowledge or expertise
CounterSocial | Home
CounterSocialHow would one find out? Is there a single or good source of truth on these things?
It's numbers aren't large enough to change the shape of the data though.
More broadly though, I have no idea how federated any of the instances in the dataset are (apart from pawoo and baraag, which are very large which is why they were excluded).
federation ... How many other instances has this one ever connected with?
defederation ... Who's currently blocking whom?
To the extent that apps + instances on the Fediverse support the relevant Mastodon APIs (many apparently do), it's possible to get decent answers to both.
counter.social 0
gc2.jp 0
pravda.me 31
This sloppy metric counts the number of unique domains *ever* seen from that instance, so it tends to overcount *current* connectivity. (Also, some Masto admins use tootctl to manually prune spam domains after forkbomb attacks, but others don't.)
https://fba.ryona.agency/
For all the dramatic talk about defederation, it seems like most instances don't actually do that to each other. (However, I haven't been able to assess how complete the coverage of this dataset is, so YMMV.)
Might not wanna use, or link to that tool ma dude.
My belief is that most of the users in very large instances are those that created an account to try out the Fediverse/Mastodon but then abandoned it, while smaller instances have a much higher retention rate -- so not strictly true that half the users are in the top 20 instances, but you know, no data to prove it π¬
probability distribution
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)Awful article.
Where did the laws with s other than 1 come from?
In case you care, I did a general revision on that article. But there are still plenty of holes and rough spots...
@fediversenews @aral
statistical principle about ratio of effects to causes
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)