Embed Notice

HTML Code

<blockquote style="position: relative; padding-left: 55px;"><section><a href="https://social.fennell.dev/users/matthew/statuses/113884695523717462">Matthew Fennell (matthew@social.fennell.dev)'s status on Saturday, 25-Jan-2025 03:16:02 JST</a><a href="https://social.fennell.dev/@matthew" title="matthew@social.fennell.dev"><img src="https://gnusocial.jp/avatar/247000-48-20240305132120.webp" width="48" height="48" alt="Matthew Fennell" style="position: absolute; left: 0; top: 0;">Matthew Fennell</a><div><a href="https://nerdculture.de/@ij/113882337898681325" rel="in-reply-to">in reply to</a><ul><li><li><a href="https://gnusocial.jp/user/165076" title="metin@graphics.social">Metin Seven 🎨</a></li><li><a href="https://gnusocial.jp/user/321780" title="jze@norden.social">Jesper Zedlitz</a></li></ul></div></section><article><p><a href="https://nerdculture.de/@ij">@ij</a> <a href="https://norden.social/@jze">@jze</a> <a href="https://graphics.social/@metin">@metin</a> I think we need better terminology for open networks.</p><p>Christine Lemmer-Webber wrote a great post (<a href="https://dustycloud.org/blog/how-decentralized-is-bluesky/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://dustycloud.org/blog/how-decentralized-is-bluesky/</a>) which defines "federated" vs "decentralised".</p><p>Would you agree to these statements?:</p><p>Matrix and XMPP are federated.</p><p>The XMPP network is less centralised than the Matrix network (in terms of clients, server operators, who drives protocol development etc).</p><p>I feel some people really value decentralisation (🤚) but others are ok as long as there is federation</p></article><footer><a rel="bookmark" href="https://gnusocial.jp/conversation/4441105#notice-8689784">In conversation</a><time datetime="2025-01-25T03:16:02+09:00" title="Saturday, 25-Jan-2025 03:16:02 JST">about 5 months ago</time> <span>from <span><a href="https://social.fennell.dev/@matthew/113884695523717462" rel="external" title="Sent from social.fennell.dev via ActivityPub">social.fennell.dev</a></span></span><a href="https://social.fennell.dev/@matthew/113884695523717462">permalink</a><h4>Attachments</h4><ol><li><article><header><div>Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: dustycloud.org</div><h5><a href="https://dustycloud.org/blog/how-decentralized-is-bluesky/">How decentralized is Bluesky really? -- Dustycloud Brainstorms</a></h5><div></div></header><div></div><footer></footer></article></li></ol></footer></blockquote>

Corresponding Notice

Embed this notice
Matthew Fennell (matthew@social.fennell.dev)'s status on Saturday, 25-Jan-2025 03:16:02 JSTMatthew Fennell
in reply to
@ij @jze @metin I think we need better terminology for open networks.
Christine Lemmer-Webber wrote a great post (https://dustycloud.org/blog/how-decentralized-is-bluesky/) which defines "federated" vs "decentralised".
Would you agree to these statements?:
Matrix and XMPP are federated.
The XMPP network is less centralised than the Matrix network (in terms of clients, server operators, who drives protocol development etc).
I feel some people really value decentralisation (🤚) but others are ok as long as there is federation
In conversationabout 5 months ago from social.fennell.devpermalink
Attachments
1. Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: dustycloud.org
  How decentralized is Bluesky really? -- Dustycloud Brainstorms

Public

Embed Notice

HTML Code

Corresponding Notice