Notices by Eric McCorkle (emc2@indieweb.social)

@tchambers I think this probably says more about voters being pro-trans

@smallpatatas Read my whole post.

@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.

@smallpatatas I have, and I have discussed them in detail in other threads. My focus here is on effective actions.

@smallpatatas You can address my arguments on the threads where I and others make them.

@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.

@smallpatatas @damon

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.

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)

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...

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

@CriticalCupcake

Run. Fast. A whole fucking ocean of red flags here.

Live-posting as I figure this out. Feel free to reply with suggestions. #kbin #RedditMigration

Looks like "subreddits" are called "magazines" and are hosted on specific instances. Beyond that, instances look like they work pretty much the same as on Mastodon.

I'm guessing looking at the magazines an instance hosts is a good way to learn about that instance.

kbin.social looks like it's mirroring a lot of reddit's communities. It looks more or less like the baseline, and I'd guess is probably the biggest.

I see a pretty good mix of things there, no overall theme (aside from what one tends to see in the fediverse broadly speaking).

fedia.io looks like it might be a bit more focused on tech + leftism?

readit.buzz looks pretty small.

@youronlyone@calckey.social @nonlinear @youronlyone@fedia.io @youronlyone@readit.buzz @readitbuzz

Are these all separate accounts, or is it possible to post using a single account?

As to that, is it possible to post somewhere using an existing FediVerse account? (I doubt it, but I'm still figuring this out)

@youronlyone @nonlinear

So then in theory, I should be able to start threads in, say, the m/tech community on kbin.social with my current indeweb.social account? I just need to use a different UI?