-

2024-06-15 17:22:55

evan@cosocial.ca

The Fediverse can grow when new people join existing federated social networks, or when siloed social networks implement federation.

Which is better?

#EvanPoll #poll

Always by person

64 Stimmen | 26%

Mostly by person

134 Stimmen | 54%

Mostly by network

46 Stimmen | 19%

Always by network

4 Stimmen | 2%

248 Stimmen insgesamt
Umfrage ist beendet

2024-06-15 17:27:12

Tommy Boy :verified:

Smootasaurus@mstdn.social

@evan random question while I see you in my feed. What's this I've been reading about fediverse open graph tags? Will that be a real thing soon?

2024-06-15 17:31:20

Tim Bray 🇨🇦

timbray@cosocial.ca

@evan Anyone who claims to know is fooling themselves. No vote.

2024-06-15 17:33:37

BoxOfRain

boxofrain@mastodon.social

@evan
I’m not sure either is inherently better.

2024-06-15 18:22:16

Floaty Birb

floatybirb@mastodon.social

@evan I voted "mostly by person" with the obligatory caveat of "but I really have no idea!"

2024-06-15 18:29:04

william ⁂ maggos

wjmaggos@liberal.city

@evan

impossible question. I refuse. but I boosted it.

2024-06-15 18:35:56

aeva

aeva@mastodon.gamedev.place

@evan massive corporate silos joining is definitely the fastest way a federated network can grow, but massive corporate silos leaving is also the fastest way it can shrink. Individuals choosing for themselves to be here is much more resilient, and maybe the true measure of the network.

2024-06-15 18:38:52

mia

mia@void.rehab

@evan when someone joins via a friend, they're often much more willing to adapt to the culture of the fediverse. if twitter were to start federating tomorrow, we'd be overwhelmed by the toxic culture of twitter, but if individuals each make the leap there's slack and willingness to change

2024-06-15 18:59:15

David Megginson

david_megginson@mstdn.ca

@evan I want a better fediverse more than I want a bigger one.

2024-06-15 19:45:51

John Francis

johnefrancis@mastodon.social

@evan it's a hard question, but I'm going with "mostly by person". I think concentration in a few commercial services has proven to be a massive problem. I don't want that concentration and it's abuses to come to particular fediverse services, instances.

2024-06-15 20:55:15

Darnell Clayton :verified:

darnell@one.darnell.one

@evan I voted “Mostly by network” as most platforms that we use implemented federation as they did not incorporate #ActivtyPub from the start (even if they embraced the idea within their respective spaces).

#Mastodon, #Misskey, #WordPress, #Threads, #WriteFreely, #Flipboard & #Pixelfed (I am naming the services I actively use) all added #Fediverse support after their debut.

I am trying to think of a platform that incorporated ActivityPub from the start. #Peertube maybe‽

2024-06-15 23:36:26

Zak

zak@social.goodanser.com

@evan Because a great many of those siloed services mistreat their users and harm society with addictive products, I hope more people will join independent servers.

That said, users of those independent servers gain the ability to communicate with more people when those siloed networks join, and that's valuable too.

2024-06-16 03:40:36

David B. Himself

DavidBHimself@firefish.city

@evan@cosocial.ca I guess a lot of people are very bad at basic math, or is it Western individualism at work?

2024-06-16 06:16:24

Mark Darbyshire

markdarb@mastodon.social

I voted "mostly by network".

Most people in my life are extremely apathetic about this. They may have concerns about their social networks, but it doesn't spur them to action. The convenience of being on the same feature-rich website as their friends is just too strong.

I believe in the role of government to force Big Tech to do the right thing. I imagine the EU will continue to lead in this space.

Still, people mass-migrated from Myspace to Facebook, so it isn't unprecedented.

@evan

2024-06-16 06:23:29

Ivy [_gay] Mae (moved, see bio)

ivy@cutie.city

@evan unfortunately I'd need a neutral option for this one

while I always worry about embrace, extend, extinguish as well as the moderation issues they pose, I still think it's a net positive for them to open up their platforms and hopefully allow migrating accounts both in and out (one can only hope)

2024-06-16 07:01:31

Dr Pen

DrPen@mastodon.social

@evan decentralisation is inevitable for all major closed platform social med/service tech, bc territorial sovereignty will require it. Federation is a desirable further option but I believe ideally must be in the hands of individual users, not only at instance level. Recent bluesky exp seem to indicate potential floodgate issues if it's not.

2024-06-16 07:17:12

squinky

squinky@teh.entar.net

@evan I voted “mostly by network” because I feel like Mastodon has hit a bit of a plateau and the bulk of the holdout users seem to think either “the fediverse is mastodon” or “social networks are companies” and I can’t envision too many ways around those aside from new big players entering the network

2024-06-16 11:47:29

Jupiter Rowland

jupiter_rowland@hub.netzgemeinde.eu

@Evan Prodromou Mostly by person.

"Foreign" networks could make the Fediverse grow tremendously just by implementing ActivityPub. But the scale on which this would happen would be greatly reduced because these "foreign" networks would immediately be blocked by existing Fediverse instances left and right, a total Fediblock would be asked for, and individual users blocking entire "foreign" networks would do the rest.

#FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #Fediverse

2024-06-16 12:14:01

Jupiter Rowland

jupiter_rowland@hub.netzgemeinde.eu

@Jupiter Rowland It's interesting that you claim the Fediverse to be defined by ActivityPub in a reply to @Evan Prodromou. The man who invented the Fediverse in 2008 by launching the Identi.ca site, the Laconi.ca project (later StatusNet, now merged into GNU social) and the OpenMicroBlog protocol (later superseded by his own OStatus).

The term "Fediverse" was first used in 2012, some five years before the first two implementations of ActivityPub and some six years before its spec was established as a standard. Back then, it was StatusNet, Friendica and the fledgling, experimental, in-development Friendica fork Red that were connected through OpenMicroBlog. In addition, Friendica and Red were federated with Diaspora* through its own protocol.

Several other projects joined in before the creation of ActivityPub. Red/the Red Matrix and Hubzilla inherited their OpenMicroBlog connector from Friendica even though it had to be rewritten. And just like Mastodon, Pleroma started as an alternative frontend for StatusNet. The only one in the bunch whose goal it actually was to pull everything together in one big network was Friendica.

Interestingly, it took "if it exists, we federate with it" Friendica until 2019 to adopt ActivityPub. Hubzilla was the first to do so in July, 2017, followed by Mastodon in September, both before official standardisation. So for a while, it was only these two which have never really gotten along with each other too well until today.

I am trying to think of a platform that incorporated ActivityPub from the start.

I think the whole Threadiverse did. Lemmy certainly did. /kbin definitely did because it was still in an early experimental stage when the Redditors came rushing in. And I guess so did Sublinks which is too new to have started out without ActivityPub.

Other stuff like Plume, Funkwhale, Mitra and micro.blog might have been built on top of ActivityPub right away, too.

If you count forks, then this applies to all Forkeys because forking the hell out of Misskey hadn't been a thing before 2018, also all three incarnations of Osada (all now defunct), Mistpark 2020 (now defunct), Redmatrix 2020 (now defunct), Roadhouse (now defunct) and the streams repository.

#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #Fediverse #OStatus #ActivityPub