cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/279006
> Note: Responses on cross-posted threads may be missed. The best way to indicate your interest is to reply to the SocialHub forum topic, or alternatively on the [Fediverse announcement here](https://mastodon.social/@humanetech/108344611621798508).
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/268746
> For poor people (ex lumenproletariat, but incl anyone struggling, which incls some middleclass 'big spenders') hard to give a hoot about privacy when like the bottom 2 rungs of maslow's hierarchy of needs are lacking.
> I personally bumped into digital privacy/the fediverse somewhat randomly when covid lockdowns were happening. Always sorta had an innate concept of privacy compared to some people though.
Some time ago I started following some Twitter accounts from the Mastodon instance I'm on, via one of the many Birdsitelive instances. Suddenly they all disappeared and I thought of a server down; no problem I followed them again via another Birdsitelive instance. Until this week: also those ones disappeared.
Then I asked to my admins, they answered they are blocking Birdsitelive instances one by one because of their huge resource consuming on server.
But: shouldn't the "weight" be on the side of the Birdsitelive server? From Mastodon I'm only reading, I shouldn't being generating anything. Am I missing some technical info?
Their goal is to encourage the adoption of the fediverse by providing an extensive guide and lists of resources for the community. It uses the hashtags found on your profile to establish what your interests are. All you have to do is to add a supplied hasthtag #fedi22 to your profile, and then add the URL or webfinger for your profile.
Most ActivityPub projects are supported (eg. Mastodon, Pixelfed, etc), and your profile will automatically be re-crawled after 7 days so that updated hashtags can be linked.
#technology #fediverse #activitypub #fedi22 #discover
Related question: ["Can the Fediverse fall to ruling class / corporate control?"](https://lemmy.ml/post/245772)
For those who don't know about EEE, I highly recommend reading at least [the Wikipedia article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish), which includes many examples of Microsoft intentionally trying to do it to open standards like CSS and Java.
As an open standard with [relatively few developers](https://lemmy.ml/post/245772/comment/169002), most part-time/casual, spread over many applications, ActivityPub seems like an inevitable target once as it continues to grow.
Take a hypothetical example where Elon Musk owning Twitter continues to cause a sustained rush to Mastodon, causing one of Google/Microsoft/Facebook/Twitter to use their large amount of organized resources to clone Mastodon's software, rebrand it, fix the most popular issues in the to-do list, make the server more efficient to host, allow bridging to Twitter (if it's Twitter making it), host it on their fast infrastructure, hire professional moderators and add many of the denied feature requests for making it more Twitter-like. With those companies' capital and established tech teams, most or all of those can be done rapidly.
So, I predict if they did, many users and even some hosts would be encouraged to use this extended 'better' software or it may even be advertised and popularized as the simplest, easiest and fastest option, centralizing the bulk of ActivityPub users. They can then use this dominant position to extend ActivityPub in various ways, making various competitors incompatible and increasingly unable to federate. Extend beyond Fediverse competitors' reach, and extinguish them by excluding them from a gradually closing garden filled with activity and popular content producers. Sure, it won't affect the more passionate 'early adopters' here as much who are more than merely annoyed by centralized services, but it's an issue that could potentially prevent these alternatives from gaining a popular audience among the more mainstream crowd who would enjoy the benefits provided it didn't require much sacrifice.
An interesting (even if not truly qualifying) example is Gab, a Mastodon fork aimed at an alt-right audience.
I recall on Fediverse stats sites, there were a few tiny pods of Gab instances and a small but real network of federating Pleroma and Mastodon instances.
I found a comment made over a year ago saying *"Gab ripped their federation code a while ago. Also, when they were federating, they never cared much about properly federating. They used federation as an argument to switching platforms but they didn't care about it."* and some users on a Pleroma instance that formerly federated with Gab was mocking them as recent as one hour ago as *"quit[ting] the fedi because they were getting made fun of [by actual free speech platform users]"*. Gab seemingly embraced the concept, unintentionally, of Embrace and Extend and then privatizing, although with (I assert) no intent nor capacity to extinguish. But what if they did have that intent, either financially or politically? What if they were a *purely* profit-driven project that saw the Fedis as a threat?
##### How can these projects counter EEE?
I don't think outpacing is a feasible approach, due to constraints that these non-profit, anti-exploitative projects are bound by.
*note: This does work both ways, to a degree, in that for-profit projects will need to have annoying things like ads or dodgy manipulative practices to survive unless they want to run at a significant loss, as an investment. I'm not sure how much most people care about those normalized annoyances, so I don't think that should be relied on. FOSS projects aren't well-known for being successful in the mainstream through their purity and ideals.*
Boycotting and ostracization (like, to generalize, Mastodon with Gab, then Gab with Pleroma) might be effective so long as they don't gain an independent dominance through bringing more external users and continuing to dilute the values of the Fediverse. But if their new platform becomes more productive and fun then the Fediverse, then the Fediverse will remain only a niche.
I don't have faith in a legal solution, but that is my naïve view, I don't know enough about anti-competitive laws, especially internationally.
I'm interested to hear what approaches there might be to what I see as a potential and increasingly imminent threat. Links to existing conversations are welcome too: no need to invent the wheel for me ;)
> EDPS launches pilot phase of two social media platforms | European Data Protection Supervisor
[EU voice](https://social.network.europa.eu/about) (Mastodon)
[EU video](https://tube.network.europa.eu/) (Peertube)
**--- Sarcasm mode on ---**
Wait, not that NATO was so united? why don't they trust Uncle Sam's platforms? Why are they afraid of Musk, isn't he the real life Tony Stark who will take us to Mars in green rockets (not the ones he smokes)?
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/247803
> Amidst manipulation of content by centralized companies, a need for fair selection of content arises.
> Mastodon is a decentralized AGPLv3 licensed software which anyone can host on their own server. Each instance host can keep a copy of Mastodon and can configure it to prioritize content fairly. People can in turn choose servers which they trust.
> Server code is always untrusted and even if server code is made open source, one cannot trust that the same code is being run on the server. This can be exploited.
> Decentralization of Mastodon solves this exploit by having many servers across the globe.
> It already has a lot of userbase.
What are some examples of grouping in the Fediverse? This question is in response to a post asking about how to stop corporate dominance in the Fediverse, but unrelated examples are more than welcome.
One example is a (defunct?) alliance between 3 national Peertube instances where they agreed to backup each others databases and have similar moderation rules.
It would be interesting to see if there's any agreements between instances to block certain instances, like corporate-run (pawoo) or alt-tech (gab) beyond merely using a shared blocklist.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.perthchat.org/post/10356
> the short version was that it was an up-and-coming federated protocol, with people working on clients and stuff, and trying to attract users. then everyone got really excited when Google decided to start using XMPP in their Google Talk product, because it would mean instant adoption by a ton of people! except now everyone just used Google Talk as their client, because it was ahead of the existing XMPP clients in terms of usability/UX, and UX work on other clients kinda died. but over time, Google being Google, they got distracted and started neglecting Google Talk, failing to enable TLS support while the rest of the XMPP ecosystem started making it mandatory, essentially cutting off all Google Talk users from the rest of the XMPP network. so now you had a Google Talk network that everyone was using with a decent-ish client, and an XMPP network that a bunch of people were using with clients that sucked, and they couldn't talk, and all the momentum in developing a strong stand-alone network was lost due to people letting Google control the whole thing
> Over the years, open-source has kinda turned from "let's build a public commons" into "let's do free work for big corporations" and it's... not a good change, to say the least
Escaping ruling class and corporate domination is one of the reasons some people choose to migrate to the Fediverse. Even some of the other reasons, like ads, engagement obsession, political censorship, content sorting algorithms, can all be traced back to corporate control.
While corporations don't have much control of the Fediverse today, could they in the future?
One might think that Fediverse is designed to make this impossible. In my opinion, it is only designed to somewhat resist this, but it is still vulnerable to ruling class takeover. The ruling class doesn't need that now, as they already control all major social networks, and Fediverse remains a niche. But shall that change, they might be out to try to control it. Can they succeed?
I'll admit and say I am very far from an expert, so I hope someone will correct me if I make any mistakes due to misunderstanding the Fediverse.
Instead of centralizing a social network in a single instance controlled by a single entity, the Fediverse can be federated into multiple instances. However, to host an instance, requires some investment, and although it can be small for some services, it is a barrier that many people choose not to cross.
Hence, as we have already seen, instances are controlled by either organizations or groups who pooled funds for their instance, or individuals who incurred the initial investment themselves. Not bad, so far. However, this does present an issue. If the Fediverse were to grow more instances, people who have money are more capable of starting new instances. It also favors people who don't live in countries where salaries and cost of living are lower, which would make renting VPS even more expensive to them. This gap is closed as the software gets better and more lightweight, but as it stands, this is how it works.
The other problem is that many Fediverse networks are already sort of centralized, in the sense that there is one (sometimes a handful) of instances that are biggest. This means If someone were to take over just those, they may already have enough control. This is less of a problem for platforms that matured more and have more instances.
If someone like Elon Musk were to go after the biggest instances and either offer money to buy them (which is very likely to work) or somehow pursue censoring the instances that don't, although that is not as easy as buying a single company (ignoring the cost difference), it is still quite easy. We haven't seen it because they haven't sought it yet, but I fear that the Fediverse is not as resistant to this as it should.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.perthchat.org/post/9739
> I think they twitter will become a lot more lax on bans, potentially more strict on banning people who make fun of elon. I think trump will return to twitter. Overall, seems like a ginormous win for the libertarians/ancaps.
> I think we should capitalize on this moment and bring way more people to the fediverse.
Note: in hindsight, half of this post is answering my own questions as I explore this rarer side of federation, but there are still some remaining questions which I have highlighted.
This post is created on lemmy.ml. The benefits of federating this post to other Lemmy instances is immediately obvious, since they can use most or all of the site features to read it as intended and interact (voting, replying, reporting, saving, cross-posting or browsing and subscribing to firstname.lastname@example.org).
There is also intuitive benefit in being able to federate with other link aggregators such as lotide and Prismo instances. All these sites have the same basic interface of link-posting, text-posting, voting, commenting and voting on comments. The base format is very compatible, even if extra features are not. I wouldn't be surprised if Lemmy and lotide form a dynamic similar to Mastodon and Pleroma, two microblogging services which again have an intuitive base compatibility.
##### But what about different types?
What are the benefits of, for example, making Lemmy federate with Mastodon, Friendica or PeerTube?
One approach to answering that is asking what cross-interaction is already possible, like some posts in [!feditolemmy](https://lemmy.ml/c/feditolemmy) which were posted from Friendica. This [nerdica.net post](https://nerdica.net/display/a85d7459-9262-6029-68aa-550236192028) which is [also replicated on !fediverse](https://lemmy.ml/post/238040) shows a conversation in replies between a few Lemmy instances and a Friendica account, and demonstrates the clear analogue of our communities and their forums, and of our votes and their likes (it's just a test ;) )
So Friendica posts federating to Lemmy makes reasonable sense. I'm not sure about the opposite. I guess their posts are analogous to our text posts or text & link posts, so it might be possible to render their forums as browsable communities here.
**Question 1: Does my Lemmy account browsing and making new posts on Friendica forums make sense?** Or will the federation only make sense for enabling Lemmy to aggregate Friendica posts and allowing cross-rating and cross-commenting?
Note: I found [this Friendica forum on Lemmy](https://email@example.com), which was properly interpreted as a community instead of a user by Lemmy, but posts aren't replicating yet. I'm guessing it's a base for future completion to allow further cross-integration. Friendica does not appear to be able to browse Lemmy users or communities yet.
I also assume microblogging sites like Mastodon and Pleroma, along with the Prismo link aggregator, can use hashtags as an analogy for communities. While a post on those sites can belong to multiple tags, Lemmy can imitate this with crossposting in multiple communities. Is this reasonable?
PeerTube is where I get more confused, and [I'm not alone](https://lemmy.ml/post/154977/). As a reply there mentioned, we can view a PeerTube user account, such as https://firstname.lastname@example.org and https://email@example.com , although it doesn't seem to work for framatube.org.
However the interfaces of Lemmy and PeerTube are radically different, as PeerTube is foremost a video hosting site and Lemmy is a link aggregator. I think it's fair to assert that a Lemmy post cannot be displayed on a PeerTube instance without hacks no-one wants, which leaves PeerTube->Lemmy posting, and mutual liking/commenting/reporting/etc.. A PeerTube video can be adapted as a link post in Lemmy. I'm not certain how a PeerTube upload would signal which communities it should be posted to in Lemmy, but there are reasonable options like an extra field in the upload settings, or a link in the description.
**Question 2: Is there a plan to have anything more than PeerTube creating link posts in Lemmy communities with federation between comment sections?**
Trying to learn the current situation in order to ask good questions has taught me a lot, I was in a mindset that we had to be able to make posts on other sites in order to usefully federate, when that isn't really our role as a link aggregator site. Media sites can usefully post to here with federated voting and comment sections.
Would you find it useful to have a community dedicated to trying out things from other fedi platforms?
Like various formatting, attachments, quotes to posts (and comments).
And where people would comment about how it comes through in their own timelines.
>You want to know the value of Mastodon over Insta? Posted this on Instagram to the 15k followers I have there, properly tagged. 29 likes, no comments.
>Masto? *So* much engagement. So much fun discussion. So much more community.
>Numbers don't mean squat if you don't have the follow through. I've never sold a single piece of art through Insta. People on Insta like passively browsing through images and tapping the heart. For an artist, it's a useless audience.
Quoting [lostinlight](https://mastodon.xyz/@lightone) who maintains Distributopedia:
> 🙃 Invitation 🙃
>If you create any art / promo materials about #Fediverse under CC licenses, please, add them to this collection:
>Also, please, use them!
Hello to everybody. I am quite conflicted concerning the way I should manage my presence on the #Fediverse, which instances to join, and how many accounts to use.
In particular, I would like to understand whether the way to go is to have **one unique account for everything** on a general instance, or rather to **create multiple accounts in topic-specific instances** and use each one to post about that topic only. For example, should I use @firstname.lastname@example.org only for posts in Italian, @email@example.com for academic stuff only, @firstname.lastname@example.org for book-related content?
I fear that having too many account could fragment my follower-base and I would lose my (already quite-little) presence. On the other hand, having separate multiple account makes sense for order and organizational purposes.
What is your take on this?
Thanks a lot!
A community dedicated to fediverse news and discussion.
Fediverse is a portmanteau of “federation” and “universe”. It is a common, informal name for a federation of social network servers whose main purpose is microblogging, the sharing of short, public messages.