Conversation

Notices

1. Hallå Kitteh (clacke@social.heldscal.la)'s status on Tuesday, 02-May-2017 05:57:01 UTC Hallå Kitteh

   • thelovebug
   • dick_turpin
   @dickturpin @thelovebug Federation without every conceivable feature is still federation, you can't force other services to interoperate with you, and the unicorns are over at http://rainbowdash.net/ .
   • Hallå Kitteh (clacke@social.heldscal.la)'s status on Tuesday, 02-May-2017 08:15:45 UTC Hallå Kitteh

     • Luke
     • dick_turpin
     @luke @dickturpin Exactly. It's a walled garden if you're trying to keep people out, not if you're reaching out a hand and the others are not interested.
   • Hallå Kitteh (clacke@social.heldscal.la)'s status on Tuesday, 02-May-2017 09:27:28 UTC Hallå Kitteh

     • Luke
     • dick_turpin
     @dickturpin @luke Who wants to keep people out? Twitter stopped offering even RSS.
   • Hallå Kitteh (clacke@social.heldscal.la)'s status on Tuesday, 02-May-2017 10:31:00 UTC Hallå Kitteh

     • Luke
     • dick_turpin
     @dickturpin @luke What's the difference between Mastodon and GNU Social?
     
     There's a plugin for individual users to send their own Twitter posts to GNU Social and vice versa, and I see my OStatus posts on Twitter sometimes, when such users interact with my posts, but there is no way for an arbitrary OStatus user without a Twitter account to follow an arbitrary Twitter user, and there never will be, unless Twitter decides it's dying and joins the free world in a last attempt to stay relevant.
     
     If it's not in Twitter's, Google's and Facebook's interest to loosen their control of users, any project that tries to be more open than them is a sham according to you, because the project can't interoperate with the data of the silos.
     
     With that definition of "Federation", why are we even here? It's doomed from the beginning. We're here because:
     
     1) We think federating with people who want to federate with us is meaningful in itself, and we accept not to wait for change over which we have no power.
     or
     2) We believe that if we do this for another couple of decades, the silos will eventually die, and we will have the Perfect Federation.
     
     I'm here for (1). I reject your insisting on the Perfect Federation and will take what I can get. Why are you here?
   • Hallå Kitteh (clacke@social.heldscal.la)'s status on Tuesday, 02-May-2017 11:05:47 UTC Hallå Kitteh

     • Luke
     • dick_turpin
     @dickturpin @luke Oh no, I miss being irritated by you, it helps me understand myself and others. Also it builds character. :-)
     
     So if this is not federation because you can't follow all of online mankind, what should we call it? Proto-federated? Pre-federated?
     
     The term has been used decades ago for just one Microsoft Active Directory domain cross-certifying the root of another, by mutual agreement. I don't see how it's any less relevant to opportunistic federation between open servers on an open internet.
     
     I'm not saying we should be satisfied, I'm just saying that "federate" is a useful word and to build a big system we need to start with a small one. And focus on the things we *can* change, like helping the OStatus network grow and making the tools more useful.
     
     Saying that the network's ideals have failed because other networks aren't joining is doing neither of that.
   • Hallå Kitteh (clacke@social.heldscal.la)'s status on Tuesday, 02-May-2017 13:41:46 UTC Hallå Kitteh

     • Luke
     • dick_turpin
     @dickturpin @luke This type of service is better, because you can set up your own server and still talk to everyone else who are using the same protocol. That is because the protocol is federated.