@bhaugen @KevinMarks @cwebber the main difference is that #IndieWeb (as I understand it) is designed around the idea of everyone having a self-hosted homepage, which implements a bunch of simple-as-possible protocols, allowing those homepages to form a social network. Obviously quite different from the assumptions behind AP (a federation of servers, each with one or more users, each with a web or native client) or #SSB (a #P2P network of native clients that may have intermittent net access)
@cwebber @neil @bhaugen @KevinMarks yeah, with all due respect to the IndieWeb folks, it kind of reminds me of those people who are super passionate about growing their own organic veges, or knitting cardigans, or restoring old cars, and don't seem to grasp that this is much harder and less appealing for other people than it is for them. Also that for some people, it's as achievable as performing your own brain surgery.
@neil @cwebber @bhaugen @KevinMarks this is some really good strategic thinking. But is still assumes that the end of goal is 'everyone is a commune of 1'. To me, projects like #RiseUp, #FramaSoft,#Disroot, and many others demonstrate that its possible to 'own your own data' collectively, as well as individually.
@neil @cwebber @bhaugen @KevinMarks if I am a financial member of an organization that hosts services for member use, under member control, that's still 'self-hosting' in a sense. I had a very confusing email discussion with RMS about exactly where the boundary lies between 'my computer' and 'someone else's computer' when you introduce this aspect.
The reason we are going with personal ActivityPubs (as well as organizational ActivityPubs) is that an individual (me, for example) can participate and federate with many organizations and other individuals.
Any or all of those could be hosted by cooperatives.
But the structure matches what we see happening around us.
@bhaugen @neil @cwebber @KevinMarks sure, I am in no way opposed to individual instances. But I'm thinking about my Mum as a potential user, or even my brothers and sisters. I just can't imagine a time that they're ever going to be willing to admin their own instance. Some of them don't even admin their own devices, after years of owning computers of various kinds ;)
@bhaugen Easy hosting - yes please! Definitely part of the vision? Starting now, not in the future! For example, I'm stunned there seems to be no hosting service for Mediawik that doesn't require me to adopt the 'server admin' role - which I absolutely don't have time or priorities or brain cells for. I could really use a wiki. But no way am I going to hack CSS or install modules - no matter how well written the help files are. Life's too short.
@strypey @neil @cwebber @KevinMarks
@KevinMarks @mike_hales @bhaugen @neil @cwebber indeed, and the ISPs or the telecos (or both) heavily throttle upload bandwidth vs. download bandwidth so they can charge premium prices for hosting. I would like to see anti-trust action to separate these two businesses. We successfully did this in Aotearoa to prevent the owner of the entire NZ fibre infrastructure from also running an ISP, so all other ISPs weren't buying service from a direct competitor.
> Easy hosting - yes please! Definitely part of the vision?
> Starting now, not in the future!
No. Somebody (probly more than one person) needs to do some work and probly spend some money. But we'll definitely be talking to the various hosting cooperatives.
@mayel Slight tangent . . I'm experimenting (tentatively) with #beaker browser & pages written in #markdown in a repo shared over #dat as a basis for a website hosted on my own laptop boosted via #hashbase platform host. Far fewer features than Mediawiki - unless somone arranges a beaker hackathon? But maybe a regime like this is within the limited scope of a 'non-admin' user? The P2P capability might offset fewer bells & whistles?
@bhaugen @KevinMarks @cwebber @neil @strypey
@bhaugen It actually seems easier to me this way :D I know how to write markdown the browser is a clean writing/file-management environment (very familiar to folks in the git world?). So, the prospect of being part of leading-edge P2P exploration feels very low risk. Risk will get a whole lot higher, when I stop tinkering, invest a load of content into a website, and start sharing! One step at a time . .
@mayel @KevinMarks @cwebber @neil @strypey
@mike_hales Tara Vancil appears to be pingable.
Beaker-published dat websites can present with an http domain name, in normal browsers. Firefox, as of recently, half-recognises dat protocol but AFAIK prompts viewing in beaker, if installed. Not sure yet. But I think that's as far as integration goes. Anyone out there understand this more fully?
@mayel Thanks Mayel. In fact it was at webarchitects that I was disappointed to find no 'server admin-free' package for Mediawiki. They will host. But I would have to manage the apps/modules they were hosting. Too tech and time consuming for me. Content is where my time goes.
It would be helpful to know the other side - how time consuming/costly/ill-fitting would this kind of 'tech-naive' service be, for a coop that basically offers common-carrier hosting to tech-capable clients?
I think somebody posted this here before, but it applies to this, too. How capitalism teaches everybody to exploit everybody they can possibly exploit.
I read a parable about a locksmith: Early in his career, he's not good at picking locks. It takes him a long time and is obviously a lot of effort. People who call him out can see how much work he's putting in and give him tips that reflect the effort they see. Later, he gets good at picking locks and it looks effortless, so his tips decline as he improves.
The point the author didn't intend to make is that in the US, tipping makes service seem like entertainment.
@mike_hales @bhaugen @neil @cwebber @KevinMarks I can definitely envision a time when installing a server app on a GNU/Linux system is as easy as installing an end-user app, or indeed installing a GNU/Linux system itself. Both of these used to require wizard-level skills, but lots of work has been by done by distros to make it easier and easier. This is an important goal. But however easy it becomes, some people just won't do it. I don't know why, but that's my experience.
A half-serious 'why' . . I 🧡 'my' MacOS UX 25 yr deep and left Windows-ish UIs just as soon as I could, never to willingly return. Until open apps reliably present with equivalent 'architectural' form, hidden machinery and graphic-design literacy (Jobs legacy?!) I'll find it hard to commit - even knowing AP is underneath and P2P is at stake. Git-style UI is a bit Bauhaus and puritan for me? Aesthetics over efficiency? O dear 🙄 End of confession 😉
@bhaugen @neil @cwebber @KevinMarks
Maybe these folks don't 'admin' their computers. But do they stock their smartphones with apps from the app shop? Isn't that one version of 'admin' in the OAE future . . running on an infrastructure of Holo, SSB, Dat, whatever? Isn't self 'admin' what the PLANET vision of an OA OS is about? 'Just' an extension of the smartphone universe so many folks now live in? Have I got this wrong?
I recommend Virus of The Mind (R. Brodie), once you recognize software as memetic in nature, it becomes easier to see how to close the loop and make something which will have impact. Also helps with understanding why 99% of OSS software is "for developers".
@cjd @cwebber @neil @bhaugen @KevinMarks I think it's a phenomenon we're all aware of, although there are different opinions about the ideal solution. Some devs still think the solution is for everyone to become a dev (and grow their own veges, and knit their own cardis, and ... ;) Thanks for the reading suggestion, any idea where I can get a copy?
@cwebber @strypey @neil @bhaugen I don't think we disagree about goals, but about methods to some extent. Indieweb was founded after frustration with large complex federation efforts aimed at big companies, and refocusing on web-centric models that are small and simple to implement.
OStatus has a lot of these complexities included (webfinger and salmon being the most egregious). https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/AccountDiscovery has some of this.
Kevin, can you federate with all of the people in this message from an indie.web place-to-stand?
If not, what would it take to be able to do that?
Or conversely, what would it take for eg a one-person ActivityPub (which I got) to be able to federate with you communing from an indie.web place?
(Was that all clear?)
It should be possible for you to subscribe to an indieweb site via atom and webpub, but mastodon wants a lot of webfinger wrangling to do that.
I wonder if a federated system would ever beat out a decentralized vision. Mastodon instances come and go and data could be, will be, lost forever, somebody else besides you gets to decide the rules of the road.
Open systems can have closed leadership that does not gel well with the idea of putting users in control of their data,
Greg, I am missing something.
What's the diff in your mind between decentralized and federated? And what closed leadership do you have in mind in each case?
For example, if we do personal activitypubs (which we are doing) and then we federate them, is that decentralized or federated?
Or are you considering federation to mean only large sites with lots of members which federate with other large sites with lots of members?
Federated=open protocols allowing different instances to talk but still requires some central server, an admin and a bunch of users to call that admin a fascist nazi whenever they make a small change.
Decentralized=open protocols all run on individual instances with no concentrated power or loss of data if someone shuts down server
@jgmac1106 @bhaugen @KevinMarks @cwebber @neil the reality is, unless you engineer a protocol to be only capable of supporting single-user apps (if that's even possible), a decentralized network will have a mix of multi-user and single-user instances. It's up to each user to decide which to use. Ideally, at some point, individuals accounts will become totally portable between instances. This is already possible with Hubzilla (using Zot protocol).
@strypey @jgmac1106 @bhaugen @KevinMarks @cwebber Yes I think Hubzilla has done it nicely. With both nomadic identity, and also simply the groups idea (not original to Hubzilla ofc). For me interest groups should be decoupled from infrastructure. I'm interested in both coops and solarpunk, but I shouldn't need an account on social.coop and sunbeam.city to get the goodness of both. I want to just exist as myself, but be part of both groups. Tags don't cut it.
@strypey @jgmac1106 @bhaugen @KevinMarks @cwebber I find indieweb and Hubzilla close in spirit. You have one identity, you can self-host yourself or you can exist on a hosted service. You can move around if you want. Your hosting choice does not determine who you follow or what groups you are most closely associated with. I've not really seen a way in indieweb yet to subscribe to an existing interest group. Hubzilla is v. cool but I like indieweb plurarity of implementations.
@jgmac1106 @neil @strypey @bhaugen @KevinMarks One route is Capability URLs, for all posts but there is a problem with them which is that contemporary browsers and URLs leak them everywhere https://www.w3.org/TR/capability-urls/
Here's a hint on how to get around that: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/cap-talk/TRsGcg80Z0g but I need to make this thinking more coherent to everyone
@jgmac1106 @neil @bhaugen @KevinMarks @cwebber this is already possible with #Hubzilla, using #Zot. Your private posts and shared media stay on the server(s) you host your channel(s) on, and you can decide which other Hubzilla users to share them with. Once Hubzilla is upgraded to Zot/6, it will also federate with two newer Zot apps, #Osada and #Zap.
... and you don't. That's the whole point of open, federated protocols like #OStatus and #ActivityPub (and even the Diaspora variant of OStatus). The apps that use these are not monocultures (in the #IndieWeb sense) and never have been. !groups exist in OStatus and in AP, but working implementations are still in progress.
> For me interest groups should be decoupled from infrastructure
#Guppe semi-solves this problem, by allowing a group hosted by an instance like gup.pe to be followed and posted to by any user on an AP-compatible instance (in theory, I've only tested with Mastodon so far). See: