The Verge article extolling the #Fediverse. I personally think the writer has the wrong point. #Facebook isn't good. Its attraction is "everybody I know is on Facebook" and not any of its half-baked features. Therefore, multiprotocol / multi-network federated social is important to dethroning #corpocentric #socnets like XTwitter ( #x.com / #twitter ) and Meta's Facebook & #Instagram.
I feel this writer's exuberence will turn out to be fantasy, mostly because of misunderstanding what keeps people in the walled gardens and what it will take to free them.
The Iris #Nostr client on #Android now has a "block and mute" function, so I've started using that against the #spambots.
Nostr has some great ideas that are way beyond what either #OStatus or #ActivityPub branches of the #Fediverse are doing, but the spam and the fact that there's a really big #Bitcoin "Maxi" faction there are chasing regular people away.
#Meta / #Facebook is building a #Twitter clone under their #Instagram brand. Apparently, there's discussion of various #ActivityPub #Fediverse projects' lead developers signing an NDA and having discussions with them.
The participants appear to be deleting evidence.
I'm not spinning a conspiracy theory. I just don't think Gargron or Dansup have any idea what kinds of restrictions an NDA can contain. They risk long-term damage to their projects and some impact on their careers.
Afterwards, I did a test connection to the #Federati #Murmur / Mumble server. It disconnected once over a ten minute test.
So if I do another #Office_Hours voicechat soon, understand that my connection may be interrupted.
Anyway, I got some great ideas. A has been trying to document #ActivityPub itself (S2S and C2S designs), various implementations (including the Mastodon API that is often used instead of AP_C2S), as well as other #federated communication protocols such as #Matrix and #XMPP. They suggested that "a better Matrix" might be able to be built atop AP.
I used to watch their game streams years ago, but the voice sounded different over Mumble. I'm told that getting a better microphone made the difference.
Yes #itWorksLikeEmail but still I really don't understand how #friendica works. For example on this thread libranet.de/display/0b6b25a8-1… the original post was sent to 103 remote servers, my friend digit@iviv.hu commented on it. My response to his comment was sent to 24 servers, but my response to my own comment was sent to 105 servers. I suspect him being on Diaspora* and most of my contacts being on platforms like #Mastodon than only support #ActivityPub has an influence here.
If I try to reference the same post from my Masto account, I thought it would look super weird, like I was talking to myself in a way that didn't make any sense, but I actually only see the OP https://hostux.social/@fu@libranet.de/109835482564374801 https://hostux.social/%C2%ABblock-4359556512123479765-0%C2%BB while when I search for my later comment I see it libranet.de/display/0b6b25a8-2… and the comment of my own I was replying to, but not the OP !Friendica Support
#Medium link; don't be surprised if it does weird things before showing you the article.
"Mastodon brought a protocol to a product fight"
> Yes, yes, the network is under immense strain as people flee the Elon strain infecting Twitter. But come on, there are folks who really believe this is going to replace, or even stand alongside Twitter, as a massively scaled social network? I call bullshit. While it’s impressive that millions of users have apparently given Mastodon a try, the product is far too slapdash and clunky to keep folks engaged. A lump of coal.
No, it isn't meant to be a #Twitter replacement. Keep your Twitter account until you no longer want it--or the company closes and the site shuts down--you can use Mastodon alongside Twitter.
And the #Fediverse networks are much more than just #Mastodon. Don't think you have experienced the network and all it has to offer if all you've done is briefly tried to use Mastodon, because you haven't experienced it.
> I’ve somehow avoided signing up for the service up until now. Largely because signing up was and is so comically obtuse — pick your server everyone, hope you choose wisely!
Have you not used e-mail? It works the same way. You pick a server, such as Gmail or Outlook dot com, and sign up. Please tell me you realize that the people you communicate with are not all on the same e-mail service that you use.
> But, but, it’s not a product, it’s a protocol. Yeah, that’s a nice thing to say. And to believe in. But I truly believe the ship has sadly sailed for such idealism in this space. Jack Dorsey can talk about how this should have been what Twitter was from the get go until he’s bluesky in the face. It’s just not going to happen. And he’s more to blame for that than most everyone else. As is he for the Elon element of this current equation. But that’s a different story.
Okay, so how about this story: Twitter has only been profitable two or three years of its entire history. Since it started, it has existed by burning through investors' funds. Eventually, with or without Elon Musk's ownership, that runs out. Without such funding, their corporate-centralized ( #corpocentric ) model cannot exist very long. And same for their centralized competitors, such as Post.news, Gab, Parler, and so on. What is left is either #federated or #peer-to-peer approaches, where no single entity is responsible for funding and managing the entire network. So whether it is the #Fediverse ( with #ActivityPub and #OStatus and their successors ) & the Federation ( with #Diaspora ) or #Bluesky, or #Twister, or #NOSTR, the eventual future of #socnets is #decentralized, if not entirely peer-to-peer unless a national government takes over Facebook and Twitter in order to provide effectively unlimited resources. It is the protocol that makes it possible for thousands or millions of instances to displace and replace one big centralized instance.
@clacke Our #KWNPSA user group chatted with the #GetTogether developer a few months ago. He said demand for self-hosted G2G instances was minimal, and event interchange even more minimal. So #ActivityPub support on G2G has stalled, and he considers G2G more or less stable and mature.
Libervia / Salut a Toi project is working on a protocol bridge, so that !xmpp based #socnets and #ActivityPub + #HTTP based social networks can interact.
I actually think that the overwhelming majority of blocking should be done by individuals curating their own timelines. I am sensitive to the effect on the Fediverse as a whole, especially as we've already been through this.
Even the original #bifurcation (when the largest instance at the time, Identica, severed communication with #StatusNet / #GNUsocial & #OStatus and switched to the #Pump.io protocol and software) and the subsequent #ActivityPub - #OStatus split have caused untold breakage. I've seen AP-side devs, admins, users patting themselves on the back while commiserating about brokenness that is built into the protocol itself or at least its common implementations.
I have also seen people telling other people to create "alts" on various instances, so that their posts can reach all of their intended contacts. Not for resilience against instance shutdowns or separating by posts and recipients by topics and interests (which is what groups and Diaspora style Aspects / GPlus style Circles are for), but because #blockwars prevents posts and members from one instance to be seen on certain others.
For the record, I think that instance governance is something that Mastodon should include in its instances.social instance-picker, along with instances' topical foci. People should have a way to see what they're agreeing to (and what the alternatives are) before the sign up.
In other words, it isn't my way or the highway so much as it is making it possible to know what one is getting into. I am certain that there are (or were) instances with democratically chosen rules. I also believe that we're not doing the people who use an instance any favor by not making it possible for them to contribute to the financing and administration of the instance. If you're paying all the costs and doing all the work to maintain and moderate the instance, it is difficult to let an election institute a policy that you disagree with. (I've started to really disagree with the idea of individuals hosting public instances wholly out of their own financial and time resources. Besides the "truck factor", it is much easier to keep an instance going if everything was already handled by a team and at least partly member supported.)
On the other hand, if the instance encourages those in its membership who can do so to participate in keeping it going, then it is perfectly reasonable to expect the admin team to carry out the decisions voted by the membership. I do realize that not everyone can contribute funds, nor can everyone do the technical labor ... but as @simsa04 will remember, things like writing documentation, contributing in discussions about improving the software, designing and implementing themes, and even marketing-type tasks such as creating a logo and a favicon or promoting the instance to people outside the #Fediverse are beneficial.