We’ve barely scratched the surface of what the open social web can be — and it’s already better than what we have.
  • pelespirit@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    12·
    1 year ago

    I think people need to read this part especially, get ready for the greeds to come in. It’s happening already and it’s going to get worse.

    We’re still in the very early days of the fediverse, and it’s going to be messy for a while. It might feel like you’re seeing the same posts too many times, and like you see some posts that obviously weren’t meant to be seen in the app or feed you’re using. Some particularly thirsty influencers are going to go hard on cross-posting tools that threaten to clutter up all your feeds everywhere and become totally unavoidable. This is not a problem with the protocols; it’s an opportunity for better products. There’s plenty of money to be made in the fediverse, and plenty of space for new products to take off.

    • CrayonMaster@midwest.socialEnglish
      2·
      1 year ago

      That’s really the entire article. “Yeah, for now its run by hippies who care about privacy and run servers out of a sense of civil duty, but we can fix that”

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldBEnglish
    4·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:

    If we do this correctly — if the next phase of how we congregate and communicate online is built for humans and not advertisers — there won’t be a new titanic company to rival Meta or a platform with eye-poppingly huge numbers like Facebook.

    The infrastructure underlying all of this is typically ActivityPub, a decade-old protocol overseen by the World Wide Web Consortium (also known as the group more or less in charge of how the internet works).

    (We really don’t need to get into the whole story of what happened to Twitter since then, except to say that the speed with which that platform changed made a lot of people acutely aware that we need a social ecosystem that can resist the whims of a single company or CEO.)

    The simplicity is the point: since ActivityPub is not a product but a data format like PDF or JPG, what you do with those messages, those URLs, those inboxes and outboxes, is entirely up to you.

    The most consistent argument against the long-term viability of platforms like Mastodon is that most people don’t give a hoot about the underlying protocols and infrastructure of their apps and just want things to be easy, reliable, and useful.

    Forget the hand-wavy protocol stuff for a second — one of the best things about embracing ActivityPub is that it sticks a crowbar into a single Voltron-ic product like Facebook or Twitter or Snapchat and pries it apart into its component pieces, each one ripe for innovation and new ideas.

    The original article contains 1,920 words, the summary contains 254 words. Saved 87%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!