Our experience with the Fediverse, and why we left
infosec-handbook.eu
Our experience with the Fediverse, and why we left
1–10 of 224 posts
Re: Our experience with the Fediverse, and why we left
#2This article doesn't discuss why the organization in question didn't just self-host their own fediverse presence, perhaps using a CMS plugin like one available for WordPress. I'm not familiar at all with this "InfoSec Handbook" group but what I'd like to see at some point is a software platform that allows organizations to spin up fedi presences at their own domain (Write.as does this, but it'd be nice to have other players in the ecosystem), or even if traditional SaaS vendors would just adopt the underlying W3C protocols to allow for that.
Re: Our experience with the Fediverse, and why we left
#3> The “I read headlines only” problem
This remains true for most platforms, not just those in the fediverse. HN is one example!
I am reading this article with great interest. I've recently started exploring fediverse platforms with much excitement. I'm more interested in building a community at the moment, and although this can be achieved with a classic bulletin board system, the fediverse had me curious.
Re: Our experience with the Fediverse, and why we left
#4They joined mastadon not the "fediverse". Like saying you used the internet but then only visited Facebook.
Point 2 and 3 are identical on Twitter BTW.
Re: Our experience with the Fediverse, and why we left
#5so you didn't like a particular implementation of activitypub designed for a specific ux not aligned with you, and some people you didn't like tried to argue with you on the internet.
these are problems you will have in any social media.
open source and federation give you the chance to find or design an implementation you do like.
people are much harder but at least you're not beholden to dictated rules from a large american corporation, and you aren't waiting on some unknown entity to moderate.
issues you raise with privacy are generally understood. public things are of course public. but there is also a lot of fediverse happening in places you can't see, and users in that space can satisfy themselves knowing those conversations aren't likely to live forever.
publishing and consuming rss is a good conclusion since you're oriented to longform content and less casual discussion.
Re: Our experience with the Fediverse, and why we left
#6> The “I read headlines only” problem This remains true for most platforms, not just those in the fediverse. HN is one example! I am reading this article with great interest. I've recently started exploring fediverse platforms with much excitement. I'm more interested in building a community at the moment, and although this can be achieved with a classic bulletin board system, the fediverse had me curious.
This actually wouldn’t be a problem as long as headlines are descriptive and accurately summarize the content of the article.
Re: Our experience with the Fediverse, and why we left
#7As a regular fediverse user, the main detail I'd be curious about is: Which server was the experiment done on and which servers were federated with?
I don't have anything against this article per se, but it's worth noting every fediverse encounter is different.
My main take on this article is that it's like walking into a McDonald's and being upset they don't serve pizza and then condemning all fast-food as being terrible because it's not all pizza.
Re: Our experience with the Fediverse, and why we left
#8They joined mastadon not the "fediverse". Like saying you used the internet but then only visited Facebook. Point 2 and 3 are identical on Twitter BTW.
That analogy is a bit too harsh. How about like saying you went to Texas but then only visited Austin?
Re: Our experience with the Fediverse, and why we left
#9They joined mastadon not the "fediverse". Like saying you used the internet but then only visited Facebook. Point 2 and 3 are identical on Twitter BTW.
People who don't fully understand certain emerging technologies are free to spread FUD about that technology to their hearts content.
Nevermind that the Fediverse is not an emerging technology, having been in operation for almost 13 years* at this point.
* https://web.archive.org/web/20201028234912if_/https://mastod...
* https://web.archive.org/web/20210124192004/https://social.di...
Re: Our experience with the Fediverse, and why we left
#10As a regular fediverse user, the main detail I'd be curious about is: Which server was the experiment done on and which servers were federated with? I don't have anything against this article per se, but it's worth noting every fediverse encounter is different. My main take on this article is that it's like walking into a McDonald's and being upset they don't serve pizza and then condemning all fast-food as being ter…
> Which server was the experiment done on and which servers were federated with?
They discuss this in their earlier post (https://infosec-handbook.eu/news/2020-05-31-monthly-review/#...):
"We experienced the shutdown of our Mastodon instance twice. So, we migrated from securitymastod.one to mastodon.at, and then to chaos.social. Each time, we lost all of our posts, leaving behind a considerable number of dead links."
IMO organizations should self-host (same as with email, if you have a domain name that you are commonly associated with). If you aren't doing this, you don't fully understand the mechanics of the Fediverse or the underlying W3C ActivityPub protocols.
edit: by self-host, I mean either run your own infra or subcontract that out to a competent vendor. I don't literally mean self-host in the strictest sense.