Fediverse stuff

0 readers

14 users here now

This is a magazine dedicated to posts about the Fediverse and things related to it. This is a MBin magazine, but you can follow it from Lemmy or Piefed as well. If you want to post specifically about Mbin feel free to post into !mbinmeta@gehirneimer.de

Recommended magazines

Rules

Please stay on topic, if it's off-topic please write [META] in the title. Please report off-topic posts if you see them.
Try to avoid drama related posts, for this type of content you can go to !fediverselore@lemmy.ca

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Fitik@fedia.io

submitted 4 months ago by trwnh@mastodon.social to c/fediverse@fedia.io

96 comments fedilink hide all child comments

idk where to really put this (might turn into a blog post later or something). it's what you might call a "hot take", certainly a heterodox one to some parts of the broader #fediverse community. this is in response to recent discussion on "what do you want to see from AP/AS2 specs" (in context of wg rechartering) mostly devolving into people complaining about JSON-LD and extensibility, some even about namespacing in general (there was a suggestion to use UUID vocab terms. i'm not joking)

1/?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] trwnh@mastodon.social 1 points 4 months ago (41 children)

if you want to turn "activitystreams" into a "protocol" then sure i guess you can do that

but why? what are the needs we're trying to address here? of what purpose is your "protocol"? social networking? you want a "social networking protocol"?

before you convince people that a "social networking protocol" is necessary, you have to convince people that a "social network" is necessary.

but more importantly, you are contrasting that "social networking protocol" against the "social Web".

28/?

[–] trwnh@mastodon.social 1 points 4 months ago (40 children)

it is my personal belief that this whole "closed-world social network" vs "open-world social Web" thing is leading to a big disconnect that makes addressing people's needs harder.

because, to be on the "network", you neglect being on the "Web".

sure, your software might still publish your "posts" as Web resources, but that's it. you're not actually granted control or ability to manage Web resources for yourself.

and that's why #ActivityPub C2S is being neglected, among many other things

29/?

[–] trwnh@mastodon.social 1 points 4 months ago (39 children)

i am personally more in favor of a "social Web" than a "social network".

what i want to do is make it easier for anyone to make a website, and to manage that website.

i want those websites to be able to link to each other in well-defined and clearly-understood ways.

i want to make friends and express myself to the fullest, in varying contexts on various websites, without context collapse.

but it feels like #fediverse is more interested in replicating the "social network" paradigm.

30/30

[–] polotek@social.polotek.net 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

@trwnh@mastodon.social thanks for writing this thread. It sparked a lot of thoughts for me.

I do have one response in the form of a question. What's stopping you from just doing the thing you want? You don't really need permission.

[–] trwnh@mastodon.social 1 points 4 months ago (2 children)

@polotek@social.polotek.net me personally? i'm not much of a coder, i'm way better at designing a system and describing how it should work, not so much actually building it. although i am in talks with some folks who seem interested, so uh... maybe check back in like 5 years? 😁 or heck, possibly even two if we're lucky!

[–] polotek@social.polotek.net 1 points 4 months ago

@trwnh@mastodon.social good luck

[–] dmitri@social.coop 1 points 4 months ago

@trwnh@mastodon.social @polotek@social.polotek.net I'd certainly love to hear more.

load more comments (37 replies)