@entreprecariat
@rra
Nothing says "open" and "decentralised" like citing Stephen Wolfram as a reference :thinkhappy:

@entreprecariat @rra
Complete tangent but I'm reminded of this great article on Wolfram vs the iPython notebook that you might enjoy. Contrasts the "maniac in the middle" Wolfram to the open source iPython team.

theatlantic.com/science/archiv

@rra I raised the question last year at fosdem during activity pub roundtable. And I felt it was not taken seriously, indded it seems people feel that if proprietary platforms started decentralising, it could benefit other people then them...

@natacha @rra @judeswae
I bet
1st there will be more fragmentation of "safe spaces" that need more confidence on who is gettin the infos, then a wave of additional/optout privacy functions in the manyverse apps ...

easily managing identities is key into this future decentralized mess impov

@natacha It it is a really big threat indeed. If there is no work done preventing the capture of the distributed fediverse social graph (like what was proposed re ocaps etc after GAB joined) the network will be taken over and made harmless. The sad thing is that I see many people here not feeling threatened but rather the opposite, feeling flattered and curious like it is 2011 again.

@rra @320x200 I sincerely doubt they're capable of this. They did not invent anything on their own network. Not the hashtags, the re-tweets, nor the good clients like tweetdeck.

This is probably good publicity for the #Fediverse. By the time they burn all the cash they got for this "new protocol" on endless discussions whether they should implement smart contracts on top of it or not, there will be enough articles on ActivityPub and Federation for the masses.

@xuv @320x200 It is not about invention but about implementation and public opinion first of all. Building good will. If anything, this will work to remove building regulatory pressure and deflect existing and potent efforts to make a proper alternative.

Essentially what I think they will do is buy talent and keep them with busy on something that is set up to fail.

@rra @xuv @320x200 I'm also very skeptical that Twitter can get any interop working in the next two years. It took them three years to get scrolling semi-fixed in the web client.

There are several suggestions from European politicians to force the big platforms to use open interoperable standards so this may just be eyewash to say "Please don't regulate! We are working on it."

@KnowPresent @rra @320x200 Ok, seems we all agree, this is a failed project from the start, between a PR stunt and a "Stay with us a little more, please please please. We're not the baddies".

I have a colleague who points out that \@jack, in his tweet, actually talks about doing this for his customers, meaning the people trying to target an audience, advertisers and alikes. And for that reason, ActivityPub is not the answer.

@xuv @KnowPresent @320x200 @natacha

That's the thing though, it's going to be a failed attempt from a consumer point of view. It's likely to be quite effective in the following points:

1) deflect currently mounting regulatory pressure

2) distract / buy out / exaust development labour that is out of their control (you can see already there are some fediverse devs that are excited at the possibility to become part of this and use for it... and for good reason, perhaps they finally get paid and recognized for their work?)

3) get access to the steadily growing decentralized social graph. As per recent facebook leak: '"The number one threat to Facebook is not another scale social network, it is the fracturing of information / death by a thousand small vertical apps which are loosely integrated together,'

Do note that this social graph is completely open to capture at the moment. Blocking e.t.c. is mostly a cosmetic feature aimed at protecting users from seeing content.

@rra @xuv @KnowPresent @320x200
Indeed for some reason it seems difficult for many tech people to not adhere to decentralisation as an only condition despite previous XMPP experiences.

Addressing the issue of protecting the social graph could be a common motivation, probably it should be addressed by activity pub developers https://socialhub.network/

@natacha @rra @KnowPresent @320x200 correct me if I'm wrong, but the social graph being in the open is not necessarly AP's fault. It's how different programs implement AP that they make it more open than others. Do I understand this correctly? The social graph, afaik, is not transmitted entirely in one AP package, nor provided upon request. It's deducted through capturing complete history of communications. Right?

@xuv @rra @KnowPresent @320x200
Yes indeed this is how I understand it also. Note that, obviously if you want to share anything based on an identity system, you obviously need to dispatch that identity.

@rra @xuv @KnowPresent @320x200
Indeed for some reason it seems difficult for many tech people to not adhere to decentralisation as an only condition despite previous XMPP experiences.

Addressing the issue of protecting the social graph could be a common motivation, probably it should be addressed by activity pub developers https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/

Sign in to participate in the conversation
post.lurk.org

Welcome to post.lurk.org, an instance for discussions around cultural freedom, experimental, new media art, net and computational culture, and things like that.