- From: Michał 'rysiek' Woźniak <rysiek@fwioo.pl>
- Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 21:06:50 +0200
- To: public-fedsocweb@w3.org
- Message-Id: <201305312106.51030.rysiek@fwioo.pl>
Hi there, Dnia piątek, 31 maja 2013 o 18:34:16 Simon Tennant napisał(a): > On 31 May 2013 18:00, Michał 'rysiek' Woźniak <rysiek@fwioo.pl> wrote: > > > or pump? > > > > I see pump as something that actually actively goes against what we > > really need right now -- a single interoperability standard for > > federated social services. > > It seems like you believe that privacy alone is enough to get an > alternative to Facebook to work. Why did this not work with Diaspora? No, and I have said so several times already in this thread. I know it is convenient for you to make this statement, but it's factually wrong. I have already said that privacy is but one of several reasons people might want to switch. Developers' independence of a single entity's policies is another, for example. There is also the question of censorship, as indicated before in one of the e-mails. And we can probably find several more. > Again we are back to the solution you are proposing is to take the lowest > common denominator of all three and force them to interoperate. Nobody can "force" anybody to interoperate. Nobody will hold a gun to anybody's head. This is something that has to be done together, in a discussion. I am hoping to start such a discussion. > If you are serious about this, you try to map the functions between the > different social networks. As I said earlier, the devil is in the details > and it's not for lack of trying. You will need to look at each API call and > each protocol call, look at how all the networks resynchronise posts and > then try to find commonality. And you will have to make sure that the > application logic matches. Of course. We have already, in this very thread, mapped some of the problems (public/private communication; what UID should look like) and I proposed workable solutions that have not been, as of yet, criticised. > You will then need to come up for a solution for the situation where one > network wants to focus on feature X that will break backwards compatibility > with two other networks. Somehow this does not happen with SMTP too much. Apparently standards can work. Imagine that! > It's nice to ignore the details, but they have a habit of coming back to > bite you hard. Indeed. Details like the fact that I do see other reasons than privacy to move off of Facebook that are appealing to the users and developers; and that I do not shy away from trying to find solutions to protocol conundrums -- details that you seem to have missed. -- Pozdrawiam Michał "rysiek" Woźniak Fundacja Wolnego i Otwartego Oprogramowania
Received on Friday, 31 May 2013 19:07:39 UTC