Skip to main content

in reply to infinite love ⴳ

the way to maintain an authoritative collection is to send out Add/Remove, not to have everyone send out Create and then expect everyone else to reconstruct the collection for themselves

yknow, actually *maintain* the collection. currently we just punt it off
in reply to infinite love ⴳ

i can't say i blame developers for taking the lazy route and doing the bare minimum to be compatible with what already exists, but that is so limiting and i'm not here for it

the bigger problem is that there's so many assumptions being made with zero basis or foundation in anything. we're just replicating stuff around and then every server assembles it however it *thinks* it should be put together.
in reply to infinite love ⴳ

we're getting to the point that the contradictions and shortcomings are starting to become more apparent...

- things like moderated conversations are impossible if you don't actually have a concept of a "conversation".

- there's so many different ways to do "groups" that it's a running joke at this point, because everyone has a different idea of what a "group" is. it's the "blind men feeling an elephant" problem.

- things like forums and subforums, chat rooms, etc are not easily possible rn.
in reply to infinite love ⴳ

the "trick" is that there isn't actually any difference between all these different presentations. if you understand "objects" and "collections" you can construct whatever you want: forums, walls, chat rooms, conversations, aggregators, whatever. it's all just objects in collections.

right now, no one understands 'collections". we just pass around objects with Create and Announce and leave it up to the consumer to figure out how they should be grouped.
in reply to infinite love ⴳ

this understanding is the base of the #OMN project http://hamishcampbell.com/tag/omn/

We need the help of someone who can write funding applications https://activism.openworlds.info/@witchescauldron/110041152391339416


We need help to write this funding https://fundpro.se/calls/2400 for these two #openweb coding projects:

https://unite.openworlds.info/Open-Media-Network/openwebgovernancebody for the #OGB

And

https://visionon.tv/w/jqTdss1qrdk4yEZiQsnMU3 for #indymediaback

We are starting the codeing on both, and funding would make this go much better.

Hamish for #OMN


#omn
This entry was edited (11 months ago)
in reply to vagabond

a website that is still not supporting HTTPS? 🤔 As they have not managed to set up the most basic things, their meaning about ActivityPub maybe should not be trusted.
in reply to Duco

Best not to be a prat on this subject, ;) the blog #SSL is broken to illustrate the disaster we made with centralization of tech over the last 20 years. Just click through, it is a test to weed out people who are intolerant and likely a waste of space XXXX

Do you get this step needed?
#ssl
in reply to vagabond

To "weed out people" and people being "a waste of space" are things Adolf Hitler would have said, who claimed that some people are worth less than others. Right wing extremists may still believe that but we overcome that thinking and also following human rights every human being is valuable. So no human can be a waste of space and no human should be weeded out.
in reply to Duco

do you understand that this reply is the sought of script a right wing troll would read out to add to the current mess. Have a look at the background o this conversation and come back with something outside this thanks. #indymediaback #OMN #OGB might help as links.
in reply to vagabond

I'm not a troll. Maybe as a German I'm more sensitive to people speaking about "weed out people". Do you seriously think that some people are a waste of space and should be killed? I don't really understand the rest you wanted to say. SSL isn't a centralised system. It's maybe not perfect, but it doesn't make sense to not use HTTPS. The video was a bit helpful but was explaining about a system I don't know and couldn't find.
in reply to Duco

OK in context weeding out people is nothing to do with genocide, this is obvuse just read in context, good faith is a start to overcome this. In the context, MOST people are a "waste of space" try thinking about the native tribes being exterminated by the incoming western culture - who here is wasters of the space?

The #SSL is about"unthinking" created by centralizing security - think what happens to the #openweb if Let's Encrypt goes down -an example of the recurring #geekproblem

vagabond reshared this.

in reply to vagabond

Let's Encrypt itself is a huge collaboration project. It's likely that if they stop that collaboration some of them will create a similar new project. Also there are some other certificate authorities that provide free certificates. And it is always possible to build new certificate authorities. As I said, it's not perfect. But do you have a better system? Crypto parties are not a reliable solution for the whole internet.
in reply to Duco

trying to fix the #geekproblem with more "problem" is very geeky but does nothing to addresses the "problem" 😀

All our projects are about addressing the issues, using "trust" you are thinking about, as "security" have a think about this #OMN
in reply to vagabond

what is the geekproblem? What is OMN? You seem to assume that I have the same view on the world as you have and understand what you are talking about, but that is not the case. Maybe try to explain it to a 5 year old. Someone that doesn't know the words and concepts you take for granted.
in reply to Duco

the are links in hashtags and search engines as a first step, let's carry on this conversation after you have done this basic step. Happy to talk about #OMN, but hard to do this to 5 years olds ;)
#omn
in reply to vagabond

what are you doing to practical make this happen, links please 😀
This entry was edited (11 months ago)
in reply to vagabond

in the short term? i'd like to develop solid docs to "prove the theory". after that i guess we need to prove the concept. either someone else builds it according to my docs, or i might have to learn enough coding to put together something for myself ^_^;
in reply to infinite love ⴳ

this is a troubling view of theory and practice. All good horizontalists understand that they come from practice. At the basis of this is #DIY that is working through practice to build theory.

To start from theory go ground and round and round then try and put this into practice, ends in a dizzy mess. When this mess is imposed as a solution we obviously get more #techshit to compost or academic wank to clean up.
in reply to vagabond

how old are you, have you ever done any frontline activism? You maybe need to.

We are building from what works #grassroots #DIY with #OMN #indymediaback #OGB based on theory from practices.

Good to engage with this flow to practice activism.
This entry was edited (11 months ago)
in reply to vagabond

well, the "practice" is having used the web for many years, having used many services, drawing from the experience of just being around and trying to talk to people. using twitter for a decade and fedi for nearly another decade, i'm what some might call an "early adopter" or "power user". the theory i'm trying to develop is based on my experiences with many, many different services, what worked, what didn't. and at the core, what it means to communicate. how to do so effectively.
in reply to infinite love ⴳ

essentially the theory i have is based in this growing feeling that we were better off with forums and blogs being separate things, before "social media" merged the two use-cases and killed off both. no longer did people publish things or discuss things with others, but now they produce "content" and consume from their "feed". sure, we can have these back-and-forths via replies and comments, but it's not really conducive to larger discussions.
in reply to infinite love ⴳ

and i've been thinking a lot and researching the foundations of communication because i also am trying to develop a clearer, simpler understanding of what it is we're really doing, via analogy to face-to-face tangible interactions. maybe this is "academic wank" as you say, but i do plan on building something eventually, or at least making it possible for someone else to build
in reply to infinite love ⴳ

so far i've managed to identify the following separate types of communication

- publishing: you make a resource available to some audience. (WWW)
- subscribing: you receive or browse resources from others. (RSS/Atom, mailing lists and newsletters, status and events updates)
- discussing: you go to some forum where other people gather. (also WWW)
- messaging: direct communication with a known audience. (mail, chat, DM/PM, and so on)
in reply to infinite love ⴳ

"our" #4opens #OMN project does the first 3 things in a non #mainstreaming #openweb native way and the last one can be done fine by current technology, the are meany #4opens chat, mail apps so little new there to think on.

So maybe you should cut short your "individualistic" wanderings and participate in projects that are already far along the path you want to start on #nothingnew is only half a joke ;)

United we stand, divided we fall https://unite.openworlds.info/explore/organizations is very basic 😀
in reply to infinite love ⴳ

so, if we were to build a "unified communications app", it should at least be able to do those four things, via whatever various protocols you wish to support. but from an everyday perspective, no one cares about protocols, you just want to talk to people or see what they have to say. for the people who do care, we want our protocols to be open so that we aren't being controlled by the commercial corporations. (i believe you call them the "dot cons"?)
in reply to infinite love ⴳ

Well I would say we need a unified communication network base on #4opens, and surprisingly we already have this, the #fediverse so #nothingnew comes to mind agen, I only half joke.

Yes, the #dotcons mad a mess over the last 20 years, and nobody who was in their right minds would not push the word together and add the hash ;)

Its basic.
in reply to infinite love ⴳ

and part of having those open protocols is having them be *good* protocols, useful and reflecting reality. not reflecting the business needs of those trying to monetize everything. hopefully a better understanding of "reality" can help develop better protocols that feel more "natural" and easier to understand and use. after that, well... that's the hard part in tearing down the walled gardens and building a proper commons.
in reply to infinite love ⴳ

#nothingnew the history of how #activertypub came about is very good reading on this subject, if you dig down you might find a history on "my" blog http://hamishcampbell.com/tag/activitypub/

A better understanding of reality is exactly what we already have, if you lift the lid on the mess and look.

For all the mess, the walled gardens are being torn down, and we are posting in commons, lift the lid and look 😀

OK we can do much better, that's what we are doing at #OMN you should help #nothingnew
in reply to vagabond

well that's the problem actually -- the fediverse is too much like "social media" right now. the problem is that applications like mastodon are designed after twitter, and so they replicate some of twitter's core mistakes even if they avoid more of the surface ones
in reply to infinite love ⴳ

that's true, mastodon is feudalism and has its own robes and crown. The #Fediverse needs to pull it into the more democratic fold, this is done by doing better on our part, the king of mastodon is very unlike to move without a bit of carrot and stick on the rest of the codebase. This is exactly the problem we are solving with #OMN projects, have been dealing with this mess for a long time 😀

#nothingnew
This entry was edited (11 months ago)
in reply to vagabond

i think "doing better" will more likely than not involve breaking from the "mastodon" fediverse. but in return, it will be more compatible with the Web and with ActivityPub as intended, an actor model for web services. there may be another break when someone figures out a way to get around link rot and insolvent authority (like if your server goes down or your domain expires and you don't renew it)
in reply to infinite love ⴳ

we address all these issues at core #OMN project. Have been working to fix the current #techshit mess for the last 10 years. The #geekproblem which is a generally a metaphor for the more #mainstreaming #stupidindividualism after 40 years of worshipping the #deathcult is a hard crap behaver to step away from, ideas are not enough, action is needed, the is the history of grassroots direct action, you can drink from this history here http://visionon.tv good to take a sip.
This entry was edited (11 months ago)
in reply to infinite love ⴳ

We need some input on how technical to do collections/groups for dataflows and database storage. This is both simple and very complex to think through 😀
in reply to vagabond

@helge

https://unite.openworlds.info/Open-Media-Network/Open-Media-Network/wiki

#OMN the feeds are the pipes join the data cauldrons. Site/apps are ladles that scoop out data, we are the hands that hold the ladle. The coding basic iron work framing of these tools.

Cauldron - syncing database
Pipe - #4opens standard flows of data
Ladle - website/app that displays data

How to write this up from a technical prospective. Help please.
in reply to infinite love ⴳ

it's not even a new idea. Dennis Schubert raised a similar criticism of "replies" distribution back in 2018: https://overengineer.dev/blog/2018/02/01/activitypub-one-protocol-to-rule-them-all.html#replies-and-interactions

> As per the ActivityStreams spec, all objects [can] have a replies property. So, a more sensible, reliable, and even more AcitivityStream’y way of handling replies would probably be adding the interaction to the replies collection

this is not always optimal of course -- it was proposed 5 years ago. but something similar could be done.
This entry was edited (11 months ago)
in reply to infinite love ⴳ

i think the key disagreement, misunderstanding, lack of shared reality, etc, is this:

are we just creating a bunch of "posts"? microblogging or regular blogging, we have our own websites or web profiles, and we only care about what we ourselves are sharing?

or are we trying to collaborate across domains? are we building a Web, a Social Web, a Linked Data Web, a Semantic Web? where our actions have side effects, and there exists some state that we care about?

we lack that clarity of purpose
in reply to infinite love ⴳ

basically we're not doing one or the other, we're kind of mishmashing them together. when you post on most fedi projects, you are publishing to your profile locally, *but* you are also sending out an activity to notify your followers. and typically, that has side-effects on remote servers. usually that side-effect is "keep a locally cached archive of that post and show it to followers."

i think we should be clearer about the separate use-cases and concerns.
in reply to infinite love ⴳ

yep, its currently a mess, though after ten years of wasted #techshit it's a nice mess to have.

Let's take this mess and shift it into a #KISS semantic web of data flows and stores. The keywords for the #OMN are simple and stupid, it's the only root that actually works #grassroots #DIY path.

We need shovels (#4opens) and compost (current #techshit) and seeds (of hope) to plant, let's grow the "commons"

The are projects for this https://opencollective.com/open-media-network

Lo, thar be cookies on this site to keep track of your login. By clicking 'okay', you are CONSENTING to this.