I've been pretty neutral in the ATProto vs. ActivityPub debates because I legitimately think the best possible outcome is they both exist and thrive. But the ActivityPub guys showing their whole asses today is making me rethink that stance. https://github.com/swicg/general/pull/45#issuecomment-3262517592
@tylrfishr that's really interesting! So, my opinion is based on history of standards; having two or three (or more) standards in an area slows down growth for everybody. Developers don't know which one to bet on, so they sit it out until a sure thing emerges. A great example is Bluray and HD-DVD; only when one side collapsed did the whole ecosystem take off.
Anyway, what was your idea, with the multiple protocols? Why do you think that's the best possible outcome? Give me an example?
@evan I think it's pretty clear where we fundamentally disagree when I say "I legitimately think the best possible outcome is they both exist and thrive," and you say "Competing protocols are not good for the space. They divide the community and prevent reaching critical mass."
@tylrfishr regardless of your answer, I don't think making a call on that question is the right thing for the Social Web Community Group. There are people in the group on both sides. I don't think it's necessary to include it in the statement in order to make the point that people should be courteous towards each other. We should be courteous because we're all human and we all deserve to be treated well.
@tylrfishr that's too bad. I don't oppose the spirit of Emelia's letter.
I mentioned in my comment, @bnewbold.net is a member of the CG. I think it makes a lot of sense for us to find opportunities to work together. He's been great about participating in W3C and ActivityPub-related events.
Wes Biggs from Project Liberty is part of the group too.
@evan I'm not in the group so I can't speak on whether it's right or not for the group to officially make such a statement. As a developer working in both spaces, I found it offputting in general for you to be so dismissive of a statement supporting collaboration.
One thing that might be nice and generous is extending these policies to others in the distributed social network community, even if they're not members of the group.
@tylrfishr last thing, then I'll stop spamming you: you should join the group! It would be cool to have someone with experience with both protocols in the conversation.
I think that finding niches in the space, and making room for interop with bridges, is a good strategy.
I think the architectures are really different. If I were going to see them take different spaces, I'd say that AP is glue that connects a wide variety independent social networks, and AT is an attempt to build a big distributed, but uniform, social network, with lots of different functionality.
As for places in history where theoretically competing standards can cooperate, I think there are plenty where multiple standards both work in a way that is mostly invisible to a user. IMAP/POP3, RSS/Atom. The Bridgy Fed folks are working towads a future where I think a similar flattening could occur.
@evan I think the designs of ActivityPub and ATProto have different aims, even though the primary use of each right now is a pretty similar microblogging application. As currently implemented, ActivityPub does much better with private spaces and deeply connected communities. ATProto does better with large-scale public conversation. I'd like to see both grow in those directions.