Eric McCorkle
I and others have talked a lot about the #Facebook / #Meta #FediVerse issue over the past few days, analyzing their strategy, and possible responses, and why pre-emptive blocking isn't an effective measure.
This leaves the question of "what *should* we do?" So....
ITT: actually effective measures for building the resilience of the FediVerse and #ActivityPub, informed by the experience of the #OSS movement.
(This is going to be a long one)
feld
Eric McCorkle
Adoption is key in preventing an #XMPP-style de-invention scenario.
Google was able to remove XMPP from the commons by absorbing most of the user base into their own platform, while most external servers fragmented, producing a hub-and-spoke situation. They then just turned off their XMPP integration.
This is also why the "block anyone who doesn't block #Facebook / #Meta" proposal actually *accelerates* this process.
So we need to ensure that #ActivityPub remains robust and interconnected.
Eric McCorkle
As to the question of what sort of governance structures work best, a common model has emerged in #OSS that most closely resembles labor unions:
A tiered structure, but with accountability flowing *downward* towards the community. Developers/committers/members are appointed based on a clearly-defined process based on experience and domain knowledge, who in turn elect a core team tasked with strategy, but who make non-binding *recommendations*, not decrees.
Eric McCorkle
An extension of this is to establish a robust governance structure for extending and revising the protocols. These have been successfully employed by the #OSS movement on important parts of the commons, and frequently resist attempts at hegemonization.
This is *extremely* important where corporate entities are undertaking development of OSS and open standards. Discussion of legal templates are beginning: https://indieweb.social/@franktaber@mas.to/110602490063783403
Eric McCorkle
On the governance angle, one of the most effective moves we could make is already underway (hat tip to @tchambers): the @activitypubtestsuite: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1l46VNMY_ULZmf0lGPKJ86a_umHqGv--WA0fynVjQaRQ/edit
Establishing robust test-suites to define common protocols is a time-tested method within the #OSS world for preventing things like #EEE. This is used, among other things, for the Java language and JVM specs, the major implementations of which are controlled by corporations. It is a part of keeping them open.
Eric McCorkle
Part 1: Protecting the protocols (#ActivityPub):
For the less technical, the protocols are essentially the "laws of physics" for this space. The key goal is to keep them under the control of #OSS and the #FediVerse.
As currently designed, they prevent the doomsday speculations I've seen floating around (algorithmic curation, surveillance, etc).
There are two aspects of this: governance, and adoption.
Eric McCorkle
Front-note: I think there's something very close to the difference of views here, so I'll try to articulate what motivates my "side".
Corporations and capital aren't all-powerful dark gods, vampires, demons, or the One Ring. They're systems that can be analyzed, outsmarted, and outmaneuvered.
We have many more options than separatism, and slowing an inexorable advance. We can fundamentally alter the rulebook, and in fact, we have in very significant ways.
So with that, let's get started...
Eric McCorkle
Nope, still wrong.
Nothing stops them from seeing all ActivityPub traffic today. Cross-referencing gets them nothing, as they already have the whole data set.
They can prioritize all they want. That will have zero effect on how my instance chooses to run the show, and I control my own followers (and eventually, moderation). Nothing they can do can stop me or my instance from filtering them to our heart's content.
misfit loser zealot patatas
Yeah so unfortunately that's not how it will work in practice.
If facebook prioritizes certain kinds of content, that stuff will inevitably be what gets shared and commented on more often, and given the size of the potential userbase, they'll effectively be able to set the tone and the topics for the wider network. Plus, you'll find you get more engagement when fb boosts your stuff, so in this way you'll be encouraged to 'dance to their algo' as I like to call it.
In terms of surveillance: at present, your social graph here is separate from whatever social graph fb has on you on their platform. Once federated, they can merge these two data sets, making whatever data they may have grabbed from the Fedi far more valuable.
In addition, due to the fact that you'll often need to click on a profile to view it "on the original page" means fb will quickly be able to link your fedi profile with their wider web surveillance apparatus.
Eric McCorkle
@smallpatatas These comments demonstrate a basic lack of understanding of how this works.
Facebook gains no surveillance abilities by federating that they don't possess today.
Facebook can't force my instance to use their algorithms to serve content, and the long-term moderation infrastructure that is being discussed here will make that both open and customizable.
misfit loser zealot patatas
@emc2 that's a gish gallop by another name. No, I'm not digging through your entire post history. You made the claim here, I'm addressing it here.
Eric McCorkle
@smallpatatas You can address my arguments on the threads where I and others make them.
misfit loser zealot patatas
@emc2 your claim here is that the protocol protects against algorithmic influence and surveillance. I'll grant you that it prevents some additional surveillance in the context of federation with meta but it absolutely does not prevent algorithmic influence.
So given that it's your claim here, I have to assume that it's your conclusion elsewhere, meaning, no you haven't
Eric McCorkle
@smallpatatas I have, and I have discussed them in detail in other threads. My focus here is on effective actions.
misfit loser zealot patatas
@emc2 You haven't thought through the algorithmic or surveillance aspects either, would you like responses to each post individually, or
Eric McCorkle
@smallpatatas So then you admit to being the kind of bad-faith actor who clips things out-of-context and discards arguments inconvenient to you.
misfit loser zealot patatas
@emc2 I did
Eric McCorkle
@smallpatatas Read my whole post.
misfit loser zealot patatas
"Google was able to remove XMPP from the commons by absorbing most of the user base into their own platform"
sorry how is this part of an argument for federation with meta lol
feld
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.