Conversation
Notices
-
@isaaac in general you can do "netstat -tupan" as root to find out about open ports and owning processes
-
@gargron My suggestion is that we distinguish this social network as public (just as blogs are public). Privacy should be achieved via networks and technologies designed for it - such as !xmpp.
The !OStatus technologies are all based on the open, linkable web. Trust is only possible on ::1
-
@geckojsc Points out the issue of asocial behaviour - a part of every social network - counteracting any attempt to introduce privacy.
-
@gargron Remember the UNIX philosophy of doing one thing and doing it well. Public and private are two wildly different beasts :)
-
@nanoha If the posts are seen publicly, which they are (and if they aren't, I would argue they shouldn't federate anyway), then disallowing subscription would be illogical (because I can just scrape your profile page).
And, most importantly: in a _social_ network, you should be able to get to know the other person's feed before you subscribe or verify a subscription. This is logically impossible if you have to subscribe to them before reading their posts...
-
@paralithode Personally I think per-post filtering inevitably ends in confused users who thought something they posted was private but forgot to tick a little box and 10 seconds later it has federated across the internet and is public for anyone - and undeletable because it was published publicly.
Mixing private and public in the same tool is bound to leak and the best way of mitigating this is to separate your public and private spheres.
-
@sophia On services like Twitter and Facebook users are required to have only _one_ single account (on Twitter multiple accounts is allowed, but you need to verify with phone number and you can't be logged in to multiple identities at once - as you can easily do on a federated network).
Facebook and Twitter offer no identity separation. Thus people feel the need to finetune, tweak and concentrate on using the _same_ identity in different situations. In a federated network that supports effective pseudonymity and near-anonymity (not requiring neither name nor phone number) your privacy is protected via identity separation. Different model, in my opinion better usability.
-
^- as soon as people bring up centralised, commercial anti-privacy networks like T/F I use this argument. ;) @gargron
-
@nanoha Private accounts (or instances) on !GNUsocial effectively disable federation. It just has to be clear to the user what you're missing out on (the clarity thing is something !GNUsocial doesn't live up to and I've been meaning to simply disable any option for "private stream" or "private post" and require explicit administrator interaction to even be able to enable it).
-
@nanoha I did not know. Last time I checked, the "log in" alternative on the site turned into "log out" when you logged in. This was a couple of years ago.
-
"talk about personal issues and such" <- I don't think this should be done on a social network that is otherwise public.
If you want to talk about personal issues, use a mechanism where accidentally forgetting some check box or "misunderstanding" (or more like Facebook suddenly changing their definition of private) a policy won't land you in trouble.
-
@nanoha I don't leave my social network (!GNUsocial) to communicate privately with people I have gotten to know here. Nor do I find it troublesome to use another piece of software (some !XMPP client) in parallell that is awesome and streamlined for private communication.
In fact, this distinction is great for usability and understandability. Also for privacy, security and organisation of communication.
-
@nanoha People still have to choose which communication client to use to participate in discussion with people they know. Some are on network A, some on network B etc. It's not like you stop communicating with people because they're using a different service than you, right? If it is, that's not a person I want to communicate with at all anyhow.
-
@adrienne I very much agree to that description of me. Users tend to have pretty lousy ideas.
-
@nanoha Publishing one's private communication XMPP ID (and perhaps even an OpenPGP/OTR/OMEMO fingerprint) in a profile description shouldn't be too controversial...
-
@nanoha Then any two users with their IDs and fingerprints published should be able to initiate communication in a completely private space with easy to use off-the-shelf !fs.
-
(@nanoha and making that process user friendly would be preferrable to smacking fake privacy onto an open web protocol)
-
@mmn @nanoha there seems to be some XMPP support by !GNUsocial (probably a module). I've never tried it though. http://qttr.at/1kqq
-
@fakerobotgamer Twitter will shut down soon anyway. Or sell to some random company because they're desperate and noone else wants to buy them.
-
@adrienne Nah, I just don't want to spend time solving "problems" I don't believe in the cause for. I think that goes for most non-techies as well.
-
@mcscx @nanoha that xmpp stuff is just to post and read from an xmpp client. pretty hacky and somewhat unstable due to old libs.
-
@mcscx @mmn @nanoha It was enabled on identi.ca back in 2008 when I joined: http://qttr.at/1ksz Evan had to turn it off for perf reasons.
-
@mcscx @mmn @nanoha ... or maybe I should say stability reasons. Anyway it hurt the server. Last use around 2010 Aug. http://qttr.at/1kt0
-
@mcscx @mmn @nanoha A look at captures of one other user and the public timeline indicates that xmpp posting may have ended by 2010-08-15.
-
@mcscx @mmn @nanoha One of the reasons I found identi.ca was actually that Twitter turned off their XMPP interface. Thank you, Twitter!
-
@clacke On Evan's smaller instances (e.g., *\.status\.net), it continued as an option until around the time he laid off all his employees. Unfortunately, I can't tell when (what year) that was. It also became a draw for self-hosters.
-
@lnxw48 Oh! I would have used it had I known. I was on unlimited.status.net.
pumpocalypse was 2012, so maybe 2011?
-
@isaaac maybe this can help you: http://qttr.at/1mpp
-
@isaaac sry, I don't know & I never used it.Some time ago some xmpp-loving people used it to access GNUsocial over their xmpp client
-
@isaaac I believe GNUsocial has a built-in xmpp server which you can access from your xmpp client. So, nothing to do with your xmpp server
-
@isaaac on status.vinilox\.eu there is an xmpp server on port 5222 (default port).I guess your instance's xmpp server's not running
@mcscx@quitter.se
MMN-o ✅⃠
Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠)
lnxw48 (Linux Walt)
All Chirp! content and data are available under the 