Re: The "Social Web" vs the "Fediverse"

That is exactly what we are working on at Neuhub: websites with social 
features built-in. And we are even going farther by creating federated 
communities with privacy features and a federated single sign on.

And most of the technologies/protocols to make this happen already 
exist. They are just not popular with the rest of the fediverse, and are 
not documented well (although we are working on that).

1. We use ActivityPub for public posts and to connect to the rest of the 
fediverse.

2. We use Zot or Nomad protocols for private channels, groups, and 
forums, since ActivityPub doesn't have all of the features we need.

3. We use OpenWebAuth (Magic Sign On) as a federated single sign on. You 
can use your social identity to log into websites, forums, and social 
media websites so you can interact locally.

The protocols to do these things exist and have been around for awhile 
as part of Hubzilla and Streams.

With these technologies, we can create interesting things like:

1. Websites with a built-in fediverse-enabled channel, that is visible 
on their websites, and also can be followed on the fediverse. Their 
fediverse channel is part of their website and has their domain name. No 
third-party fediverse server required.

2. Communities and forums that can be accessed both locally (via local 
login and Magic Sign On), and remotely via ActivityPub or Zot or Nomad. 
You can use your social identity to interact with the forum or community 
either way.

3. Create private groups, forums, or membership websites, that people 
can participate in using their fediverse identity (via Zot, Nomad, and 
OpenWebAuth).

As you mentioned, there is a difference between the fediverse and the 
social web. Some people want to create a clone of Twitter or Facebook or 
Instagram or YouTube or whatever. Some people want to create websites 
that interact with the fediverse. It is a different paradigm.

In 2024 we will be launching several websites that demonstrate our 
concepts, and will be working on the documentation so others can 
participate too. We hope that our work will be a game changer.

But the social web is being built, and it can connect to the fediverse. 
It just needs some additional features that ActivityPub doesn't have, 
but luckily we have Zot, Nomad, and OpenWebAuth for those features.

Scott M. Stolz

P.S. /email resent to //public-swicg@w3.org so it shows up the discussion.
/

/
/

On 12/26/2023 4:44 PM, Johannes Ernst wrote:
> 1. We know how the Fediverse looks like:
>
> You want to socially interact with your friends without a central 
> server in the middle? Set up a Fediverse instance, or find an account 
> on somebody else’s, follow your friends on other instances and 
> microblog (and more) away.
>
> So if the BBC wanted to do that, for example, they would (and have) 
> set up bbc.social <http://bbc.social/>, in addition to their primary 
> website at bbc.com <http://bbc.com/>.
>
> 2. In contrast, the vision of the “Social Web” is broader and less 
> “separate” from the rest of the web.
>
> E.g. Wikipedia says "The social web encompasses how websites and 
> software are designed and developed in order to support and foster 
> social interaction.” [1]
>
> So if the BBC wanted to be part of the “Social Web”, for example, they 
> would augment/change bbc.com <http://bbc.com/> to be a first-class 
> social web participant rather than setting up a separate fediverse site.
>
> 3. Roughly agree so far?
>
> But what does that mean exactly? How would bbc.com 
> <http://bbc.com/> look exactly if it were a first-class participant of 
> the “social web” that “supports and fosters social interaction”?
>
> I know what I would want to do … but there are a bunch of 
> conventions/protocols/standards missing to do that. On the other hand, 
> nobody is really working on those, at least not here, so perhaps my 
> vision is different from other’s vision.
>
> I’d appreciate pointers or explanations that outline various points of 
> view on how the “social web” would ideally look like, and also how the 
> fediverse could morph into it over time. Assuming people think that is 
> still a worthwhile goal.
>
> (With apologies to the BBC for using them as my example vehicle here … 
> obviously it has nothing to do with the BBC per se)
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> Johannes.
>
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_web
>
>
> Johannes Ernst
>
> Fediforum <https://fediforum.org/>
> Dazzle Labs <https://dazzlelabs.net/>