Considering the increasing importance of AcivityPub-driven interaction, an interesting choice might be Codeberg as its underlying codebase Forgejo has an initiative heading for federation (see https://lemmy.ml/comment/396978)
Considering the increasing importance of AcivityPub-driven interaction, an interesting choice might be Codeberg as its underlying codebase Forgejo has an initiative heading for federation (see https://lemmy.ml/comment/396978)
Definitely. But I guess the proprietary players will only take part when they are either forced to do so by regulation, or when 80% of the market already federates. So the question is probably which of the open source platforms has the biggest promise for making it happen.
Btw, a similar effort for Gitlab: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/30672
Federation and task/responsibility distribution would be exciting to solve the storage dimension issue.
Couldn’t someone train a model on their university’s computing cluster, and share it? This would boost independent research on these things for sure.
On a more positive note: Saxony was the only federal state in Germany which, during times of more strict pandemic-related rules, allowed tracking exposure using the government-funded open source software instead of some app used by the other federal states based on stolen code whose only unique selling point was being advertised by a famous rapper…
And at the same time, Saxon universities coerce students into proprietary solutions, hiding behind university autonomy when members of the parliament criticize this.
The headline is misleading, as the article merely covers the decision of the Data Protection Commissioner of Hesse (one of Germany’s 16 federal states). Many other federal states have a similar tendency by now, but in detail it can be very different, and in practise, the Data Protection Commissioners can be very patient when it comes to giving schools additional time to switch to other solutions.
If you don’t plan to host free software, you might not care.
For free software, you might consider GNU’s criteria for ethical repositories, under which this would already make the hosting unacceptable due to a violation of C2 (see https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria.en.html). Even if you don’t adhere to GNU’s definition, you might then ask yourself why your definition of free software allows for more discrimination and whether that is justified.