Live data from Hacker News

Fediverse

fediverse.party

41–50 of 143 posts

Re: Fediverse

#41

General purpose social media will be considered the greatest mistake of the early 21st century. Go back to topic-oriented discussion boards. When you have no common topic around which to organize, then people have to search each other's personalities for commonality. And in doing so, they stratify along political lines. This isn't enough, so then they micro-stratify into various, rabid subgroups within those politica…

> Go back to topic-oriented message boards. This is essentially what Mastodon instances are. As a bonus, they can interact if they want it .

[deleted]

Re: Fediverse

#42
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't dived into the specs, but how does solid solve bad actors getting access to your pod? Usually today your data is fragmented across platforms (so damage is reduced) which have centralized authorities who can step in and fix bad actor issues.

Honestly, I'm gonna be super lazy and just quote the front page of the site: > Anyone or anything that accesses data in a Solid Pod uses a unique ID, authenticated by a decentralized extension of OpenID Connect. Solid's access control system uses these IDs to determine whether a person or application has access to a resource in a Pod. Of course, as a data owner, you could accidentally grant a bad actor access to your…

But that's just it though - if bad actors gain control, you lose the ability to reject OAuth creds (which is what OpenID is). Things like social engineering or phishing of credentials, which happens at scale today.

They need a way to handle situations when bad actors take over, because other solutions handle this with centralized authorities who step in and rectify the issue.

Re: Fediverse

#43
post #32
post #3

Which are the platforms that let you own your data cryptographically and let you move your account around seamlessly for yourself and your followers? Basically the network should be in the data and the servers should be replaceable. I think those are very obvious bottlenecks that affect most of these alternative networks. On the other side, censorship is also very important, nobody wants to have to dwell into spam an…

I think this was the premise of the original World Wide Web (minus the cryptographic part) before everything was centralised. Essentially people would have their own personal web pages and readers subscribe via RSS.

That’s, to a large extent, what the WWW is today. I have my own personal site, and a collection of RSS/Atom feeds that I check to see what’s happening on other people’s personal sites. It’s surely an exaggeration to say that “everything” is centralized, despite the rise of the huge monoliths such as Twitter.

Re: Fediverse

#44
post #38

Is having both a normal social media account & a federated version okay ? I've seen a lot of people delete their Twitter and then hop on Mastodon because they're worried about Musk. Whether their concern about Musk is valid is another question. How do people see his acquisition of Twitter as a bad thing? If anything he will try to improve it no?

If these people are fleeing Twitter because they're terrified about a platform where everyone they don't like isn't banned, just wait until they realize there's no way to ban someone from the fediverse

Is that a typo? This post doesn't make sense to me. The latter isn't true, because individual instances can ban you and instances that allow bad behavior will be defederated. Elon has indicated a desire to unban users, not ban them.

Re: Fediverse

#45
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I'm gonna be super lazy and just quote the front page of the site: > Anyone or anything that accesses data in a Solid Pod uses a unique ID, authenticated by a decentralized extension of OpenID Connect. Solid's access control system uses these IDs to determine whether a person or application has access to a resource in a Pod. Of course, as a data owner, you could accidentally grant a bad actor access to your…

But that's just it though - if bad actors gain control, you lose the ability to reject OAuth creds (which is what OpenID is). Things like social engineering or phishing of credentials, which happens at scale today. They need a way to handle situations when bad actors take over, because other solutions handle this with centralized authorities who step in and rectify the issue.

I'm now confused by what you mean when you say "gain control".

Are you talking about literally exploiting a bug and hacking the underlying service that is providing access to the pod?

In that case, it's a question of who owns and operates the pod. Solid is conceived as a set of standards that can be implemented by either individuals, or by companies on behalf of individuals. Think "data ownership as a service".

So you can still have centralized entities that implement the spec and provide support and other services for users, including dealing with security incidents.

Re: Fediverse

#46

General purpose social media will be considered the greatest mistake of the early 21st century. Go back to topic-oriented discussion boards. When you have no common topic around which to organize, then people have to search each other's personalities for commonality. And in doing so, they stratify along political lines. This isn't enough, so then they micro-stratify into various, rabid subgroups within those politica…

This is not going against what you said in principle, I feel what you are saying, but I feel the need to add that I was admin of a few topic oriented message boards in the 90's and early 2000's, and yeah as you said it was pretty good simply to be able to be part of some group that cared about the same random stuff as me, and I think a big part of it is because humanity literally had not ever been able to connect so quickly on shared interests from such geographically diverse regions before, but it wasn't all roses there either.

Personality cults were a regular theme. Honestly just one individual with no other goals in life could wreak havoc by constantly weaving between the rules, launching sock puppets to do some virtual Munchausen-by-proxy performance, painting admin as the bad guys, staging crises that didn't really exist to get more followers (in the social sense, there was not really a "follow" option in the platforms at the time). These topic-based forums were often in direct competition, and on more than one occasion it was revealed (usually by infiltrating via long-term social engineering so you could get to see the IP addresses of the members) that these users were from competitors trying to stir trouble and siphon off members.

Diversity and cliquishness was an issue. Generally a community would kick off around some exciting new theme, or just a general shared interest and grow organically from there. This was great but the longer the same group hangs together, the more insular the atmosphere and inside references became. It's just what groups of people do in physical groups when they hang together a lot - they grow bonds with each other, their shared experiences strengthen these bonds, and newcomers see this and can see that it will take a lot of effort and patience to reach the same level of acceptance, and the older and more insular a community becomes, the less people are attracted to it. Then eventually the older members see there's nothing new to learn here and drift off. So the lifecycle of topic-based message boards followed a standard inception/growth/stagnation/diaspora pattern.

Generalised social media puts everyone on an even platform - albeit a pretty shitty one - everyone sucks equally by default. You're correct in that the centralisation has a ton of other side effects and I don't disagree that many of these aren't what people want (if they're aware of it). Just that as I said it wasn't all roses and we can't just "go back". There were tons of reasons why the topic-oriented message boards faded away and it wasn't just laziness or convenience. It is human nature to desire connection and a sense of place, balanced with a need for novelty and invigoration of ideas. Generalised social media provides that routinely and formulaically, they basically hacked our brains.

Also on practicality of your suggestion, we can't force people to go back. You can't put a gun to people's heads and force them to only use single issue forums. I get the nostalgia because I was a part of it and it was great for a time, but it did also have a ton of downsides.

I think we need to move forward not go back. Federated social networks are one attempt at this. It's a lot to take on board as we have to learn new things like managing our identity / signatures and learning differences between providers, but efforts are underway to try and shift us away from the big old attention silos people have been trained to use these days.

Re: Fediverse

#47

I have tried to wrap my head around how this works as a total outsider noob, and I just can not get it! But, I want to. I get the email comparison (different platforms can all speak, so why not have social media be the same?). But, then the white sheets are just all php and python and all this stuff that doesn't make any sense (I know what they are, just not what to do with that info), and for better or worse doesn't…

The W3 spec has a high level overview of how ActivityPub works.

https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub/#Overview

Re: Fediverse

#48
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If these people are fleeing Twitter because they're terrified about a platform where everyone they don't like isn't banned, just wait until they realize there's no way to ban someone from the fediverse

Is that a typo? This post doesn't make sense to me. The latter isn't true, because individual instances can ban you and instances that allow bad behavior will be defederated. Elon has indicated a desire to unban users, not ban them.

Yup, it was a typo (edited now). I meant that if they want everyone they don't like to be banned, the fediverse doesn't seem like the place for that.

Getting banned from a fediverse instance isn't as impactful as being banned from twitter, and I think those people would want it to work like twitter. Not too sure about instances being defederated though, that's the first I've heard of that.

Re: Fediverse

#49
post #3

Which are the platforms that let you own your data cryptographically and let you move your account around seamlessly for yourself and your followers? Basically the network should be in the data and the servers should be replaceable. I think those are very obvious bottlenecks that affect most of these alternative networks. On the other side, censorship is also very important, nobody wants to have to dwell into spam an…

Try https://lens.dev if you’re interested in portable data/social graph that is onchain (disclaimer - I work on this)

Re: Fediverse

#50

Is having both a normal social media account & a federated version okay ? I've seen a lot of people delete their Twitter and then hop on Mastodon because they're worried about Musk. Whether their concern about Musk is valid is another question. How do people see his acquisition of Twitter as a bad thing? If anything he will try to improve it no?

>Is having both a normal social media account & a federated version okay?

Of course it is. There will always be a small number of [insert thing here] purists, it's best to (mostly) ignore them when they moralise about only using [thing] (but don't completely ignore them, they're usually on to something, despite the hardline position).

Post reply on HN