Thanks to everyone who replied.
I think this is an important topic, because the different definitions result in different policy decisions.
Thanks to everyone who replied.
I think this is an important topic, because the different definitions result in different policy decisions.
If you think of the Fediverse as a culture, or a group of people, then questions about who can join are really important. Who has access to our time and attention? Who do we want to hang out with, and have among us?
If you think of the Fediverse as a set of principles -- decentralization, open standards, open source, anti-capitalism -- then questions about who can participate depends on if they accept and represent most, or all, of those principles.
If you think of the Fediverse as an open, permissionless network, then a lot of the shibboleths go away. Anyone can join the network -- and anyone else can choose whether or not to communicate with them.
I use "Fediverse" for both a network and a culture. I also use "ActivityPub network" or "Open social web" for the network itself. I think it's very important to make the network as open, permissionless, and connected as possible. Everyone on the planet has a right to be on that network.
I understand people's concerns with protecting the culture, and I'm fine with people using the tools at hand to protect it -- like blocklists and defederation. If you think some software or some community is bad for the culture, you should use the tools available to protect it.
I don't like the tendency of some people to brigade projects or people they think are a threat to the culture. It's an ugly process. I was disappointed to see some of the replies to the #SiliconBeest post on Reddit, here:
My work at #SWF and W3C is about making this network open to everyone, and encouraging implementers. I'm going to continue doing this.
Anyway, my answer: network.
If you think this is an invitation to share your dumbshits opinion about SiliconBeest, you are mistaken.
@jonathan which principles?
@evan Strongly agree. Even for communities I don't like and would prefer to avoid, it would be better if they used ActivityPub rather than a proprietary system.
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.