smallcircles
I am @humanetech at Mastodon, #FOSS and #Fediverse advocate, mod at SocialHub, and facilitator of Humane Tech Community.
I help fight tech harms and “Promote Solutions that Improve Wellbeing, Freedom and Society”.
- 30 Posts
- 33 Comments
https://fediverse.space/ shows graphs, I think, though currently the page blanks out on me in Firefox. So dunno if they offer the functionality you referred to.
It works but loads a bit slowly. Thanks for posting, I added it to https://codeberg.org/fediverse/delightful-fediverse-clients
In part this depends on personal preference and objective you have. If you want to be really organized then separate accounts is way to achieve that. But for me that is too much of a burden really. Gives a lot of real and mental/sensory overhead. For some things - with lack of federated identity - it is inevitable to have multiple account. Like I find myself talking to my other self between Lemmy and Mastodon :D
One thing to consider is if your followers like the combination of stuff you are interested in. If a large number of your posts are in Italian, then that may be a reason for English-speaking fedizens to not follow you anymore. Scholarly stuff and book stuff seem to go better together. NSFW not so much, for obvious reasons…
My new way of advocating fedi, may ‘campaign slogan’ if you will is: “Fediverse: Peopleverse!”
These types of instances should be filtered out by default, otherwise the site only serves to give fediverse a bad reputation. With such instances in the top you cannot pass the link to the site to someone and say “Here, discover the fediverse with its many nice instances, but be careful when doing so and keep your children away while browsing them, just in case”.
Fediverse might be Web4 in situations where it makes sense to highlight technological evolutionary iterations of the web. And if you consider Web3 to be the (failed) Semantic Web - where the 3.0 was first introduced - then it makes sense too. The Fediverse is then the Social (Semantic) Web, as it based on Linked Data open standards (ActivityStreams / ActivityPub). But in doing so you also needlessly set yourself up for techno-ideological ‘warfare’ to claim that turf. It can be useful. It can be logical. But I wonder if it is worth the fight.
Web0, introduced by Aral Balkan in reaction to Web3’s ‘blockchain-override’, is also putting emphasis on a technical characteristic. But along a different dimension than evolutionary versioning, namely “web made simple again” and hence for everyone (note: simple != easy).
Peopleverse is yet another dimension: the human aspect. It is a ‘unique selling point’ and almost unclaimed space in the corporate onslaught that the normal web has become. And certainly wrt what the Metaverse aims to be… some cyberpunk corporate-controlled world. No, thank you :)
The most important thing we have on the Fediverse, imho, is our culture. And that culture is determined by everyone’s interaction. I tooted about this this morning in reaction to something I wrote on Fediverse Town:
Be careful what you preach. Those promoting the #Fediverse to the world beyond should be well aware that that the current culture spun up by all fedizens together, are what makes fedi such a worthwhile place to be.
And that this culture is the primary ‘weapon’ in fending off unwanted forces. How we build and integrate our apps is important too, but only in a supportive manner.
Protecting and fostering our culture collaboratively is key to Fediverse’s health and future.
There will be challenges to the Fediverse to overcome in the future, and I feel that for the most part that ‘versioning the web’ will play at best only a minor role in solving them :)
Sad news indeed. I posted an announcement to SocialHub and involved with migrations of ForgeFed discussions (to SocialHub and Forgefriends) and Fediverse Party website plus the ActivityPub Watchlists (to Codeberg).
Besides two long-running discussions about standardizing how Groups work, there’s a more recent topic at Social Hub to be able to define Unbound Groups. These are Groups that are not tied to an instance, but are independent of them. With it the same Group can exist on multiple instances. The mechanism we are thinking about is a bit of a workaround to the limitation that Groups are bound to an instance via their Object ID (which is an URL).
Other than that, for a long time I am promoting a concept which I call “Community has no Boundary” (just linking to one comment, but I wrote many). It is about setting the concept of “Community” free of instances once and for all, by defining an Fediverse/ActivityPub extension for it. The “instance” means a server boundary, and that is a technical concept. With the extension we no longer have to talk about instances, but refer to communities instead. Each instance hosts one or more communities, just like Lemmy does.
But it goes a bit further than that. If you look in real life to the groups and communities you are part of, then there are many different types of relationships you have with them. You may be a ‘member of’ a sports club, but also ‘sponsor’ it, and ‘volunteer’ behind the bar in the canteen. That’s three relationships. In fedi apps we see Groups still be limited to ‘member of’ relationship and the additional privilege to be either a moderator or an admin. But it does not go further than that. With Relationship in place for Groups it becomes possible to better express the rich social fabric that exists IRL and build functionality on top of that, which takes that into account.
Your observation is correct. The project is pre ‘official’ announcement and still in preparation, but site is up publicly and that’s why it ended up here prematurely. @csdummi and I started the initiative, after discussing on United Software Development: A new paradigm? in !fediversefutures. You might say the idea was born on Lemmy :)
We have a discussion repo on Codeberg, but found a place on the forgefriends community. The website will be changed to position what Social Coding is and does more clearly and to enable the “Social Coding Movement” as our initiative will be called, to be crowdsourced, incremental and extensible. See: Positioning Social Coding and Forgefriends. We have a Social Coding chatroom on Matrix.
Yes, true. I asked the question in a more general sense on the fedi: https://mastodon.social/@humanetech/107540889998564900
The question is whether the project should be forked into multiple separate projects at all. An alternative would be to have a generic “Directory Platform” and have modules to make it a Book Review platform, a Movie Database, or whatever-you-wanna-collect platform with another module. The modules would mostly be templates and data structures + user interface widgets to present them nicely.
Bit weird. An anonymous Google Doc, a screenshot of a toot saying “this is legit” and no other references. Could at least provide the URL to that toot.