The domain https://fediverse.observer/ redirects to sedo now.

On October 11th these two commits where made to the repo:

this will be my final release, glad to have contributed since 2011 to some fediverse stats, https://fedidb.com/ is a great resource with more interest

this software is no longer developed

Sad to have lost such a great resource.

  • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
    2·
    4 hours ago

    Fedidb is so bad though. Maybe im missing something, but to me it looks like you cant even get a historic user count or comment count graph for any specific software. What use is seeing the current number? Thats just kinda useless if you are trying to get any insight into the general development of the fediverse. The thing is that the old fedidb.org literally had this, but when they moved to .com they fucked it up for some reason.

    • Jupiter Rowland@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      4·
      4 hours ago

      FediDB seems to be opinionated as well. It seems like if Daniel doesn’t like a server app, he won’t add it. AFAIK, he has been notified about the existence of Forte, but he still hasn’t added it.

      • anticurrent@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        3·
        1 hour ago

        I remember when he changed the metric on which fediverse software were ranked, just so that pixelfed rises up and rank or two !

    • Vicinus@piefed.zipEnglish
      6·
      5 hours ago

      Yeah. I saw the dead website earlier today and have been trying to figure out how to keep the posts working.

      The fediverse software post, I could rewrite some code to gather fedidb daily (to my knowledge, they don’t have all time series data available), but their MAU math is suspect. So, not a great option, but my only other thought is basically remaking fediverse-observer and I do not have a server or potentially relevant server skill set beyond cron jobs.

      For the threadiverse instances post, I can keep gathering data from the instances I already have in my database, but don’t really have another way to find new ones. Maybe, I could see if I could scrape it from fedidb (I couldn’t get their API working in the past).

      In conclusion, the posts are not in a good place :(

      • Pamasich@kbin.earth
        2·
        4 hours ago

        but their MAU math is suspect

        Do they do any math? I assumed it’s simply additive. They get the MAU from individual instances via their crawler, then display a total?
        Differences to other sites is probably due to the set of instances checked, not anything math related.

        • Vicinus@piefed.zipEnglish
          1·
          3 hours ago

          You’d think it’s straightforward and additive. I added up all their listed instances for a couple different softwares. The math was wrong and overestimated the MAU count. I checked it a few times across a couple weeks. Couldn’t quickly figure out a pattern to how the math was wrong each time.

          Maybe they fixed it in the last ~6 months, but I wouldn’t count on it. I believe it’s the same Dev as pixelfed and loops. So, not sure they’ve done any work on fedidb in years (to my knowledge, they’ve focused on Loops and Pixelfed).

          Edit: to clarify, adding the MAU of all their listed instances for a particular software was lower than the total MAU they reported for the software.