Re: Meta and ActivityPub

I agree with this sentiment and would like to reiterate something from a separate thread. Focusing on them as the "bastions of social networking" will put us in a permanent loop where we're playing catch-up. I'd like to see efforts either between the different fediverse-adjacent projects (like Funkwhale, PixelFed, Bookwyrm, Owncast, etc) or by folks here to look at _what they've implemented_ and looking into adding notes in conjunction to the AP spec so people looking to implement newer clients can have a sense as to what they're involving themselves in.

If this does seem _extremely_ pressing to some, I'm willing to help host actionable chats on https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/ about how we can do this. I've been biting my tounge on this because Johannes Ernst _is right_ despite my earlier sentiment, if they get to dictate AP, we'll see this space turn into WHATWG. But we can't focus on what they're doing but on what the community's done so far and how we can make interoperability a natural thing.

On Fri, 2023-03-10 at 09:21 +0100, Marcus Rohrmoser wrote:
> On 10 Mar 2023, at 8:42, Bob Wyman wrote:
> 
> 
> > they will probably end up controlling the future of these protocols 
> > since they will
> > be the largest providers.
> 
> 
> We've seen such before, indeed.
> 
> Honestly I assume there is no way to prevent the public falling prey to  
> big money over and over again.
> 
> But: I think aside from that communities could thrive. They need to  
> balance privacy and outreach - what is the sweet spot? I think Mike from  
> Hubzilla (et al.) does a lot right with his attitude of not caring too  
> much about the big fuss.
> 
> So, what are your goals?
> 
> Marcus
>

Received on Friday, 10 March 2023 15:41:53 UTC