1
idk where to really put this (might turn into a blog post later or something). it's what you might call a "hot take", certainly a heterodox one to some parts of the broader #fediverse community. this (mastodon.social)
submitted 1 week ago by trwnh@mastodon.social to c/fediverse@fedia.io
96 comments fedilink hide all child comments

idk where to really put this (might turn into a blog post later or something). it's what you might call a "hot take", certainly a heterodox one to some parts of the broader #fediverse community. this is in response to recent discussion on "what do you want to see from AP/AS2 specs" (in context of wg rechartering) mostly devolving into people complaining about JSON-LD and extensibility, some even about namespacing in general (there was a suggestion to use UUID vocab terms. i'm not joking)

1/?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] trwnh@mastodon.social 1 points 1 week ago

if you want to turn "activitystreams" into a "protocol" then sure i guess you can do that

but why? what are the needs we're trying to address here? of what purpose is your "protocol"? social networking? you want a "social networking protocol"?

before you convince people that a "social networking protocol" is necessary, you have to convince people that a "social network" is necessary.

but more importantly, you are contrasting that "social networking protocol" against the "social Web".

28/?

[-] trwnh@mastodon.social 1 points 1 week ago

it is my personal belief that this whole "closed-world social network" vs "open-world social Web" thing is leading to a big disconnect that makes addressing people's needs harder.

because, to be on the "network", you neglect being on the "Web".

sure, your software might still publish your "posts" as Web resources, but that's it. you're not actually granted control or ability to manage Web resources for yourself.

and that's why #ActivityPub C2S is being neglected, among many other things

29/?

[-] trwnh@mastodon.social 1 points 1 week ago

i am personally more in favor of a "social Web" than a "social network".

what i want to do is make it easier for anyone to make a website, and to manage that website.

i want those websites to be able to link to each other in well-defined and clearly-understood ways.

i want to make friends and express myself to the fullest, in varying contexts on various websites, without context collapse.

but it feels like #fediverse is more interested in replicating the "social network" paradigm.

30/30

[-] polotek@social.polotek.net 1 points 1 week ago

@trwnh@mastodon.social thanks for writing this thread. It sparked a lot of thoughts for me.

I do have one response in the form of a question. What's stopping you from just doing the thing you want? You don't really need permission.

[-] trwnh@mastodon.social 1 points 1 week ago

@polotek@social.polotek.net me personally? i'm not much of a coder, i'm way better at designing a system and describing how it should work, not so much actually building it. although i am in talks with some folks who seem interested, so uh... maybe check back in like 5 years? ๐Ÿ˜ or heck, possibly even two if we're lucky!

[-] dmitri@social.coop 1 points 1 week ago

@trwnh@mastodon.social @polotek@social.polotek.net I'd certainly love to hear more.

[-] polotek@social.polotek.net 1 points 1 week ago

@trwnh@mastodon.social good luck

load more comments (37 replies)
load more comments (37 replies)
load more comments (37 replies)
this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

News from fediverse

0 readers
20 users here now

founded 9 months ago