Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter funding a team to develop an open standard for social media

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 426 posts

Re: Twitter funding a team to develop an open standard for social media

#261

Post by kixiQu »

80386 wrote: post #169
laksmanv wrote: post #90

Does anyone on HN have an interest in building a decentralized social network together? I've been thinking about doing this for a while now. Feel free to shoot me an email laksman [at] stanford [dot] edu

What's the problem with existing ones? And why do social networks draw so much attention relative to other social platform patterns, like forums? I've been thinking for a while that there should be something like a decentralized omni-Reddit. I liked forums, but people don't want to use them anymore, because there are too many different signups and too many different notification streams/etc. on too many different sit…

Always love boosting other people's open-source projects: https://github.com/dessalines/lemmy "A link aggregator / reddit clone for the fediverse."

Re: Twitter funding a team to develop an open standard for social media

#262

Post by buboard »

ookdatnog wrote: post #203
buboard wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I m surprised every time i see people here asking for the evil that is censorship. Dorsey wants a decentralized system exactly because he won't be held liable for not censoring people. It makes sense business-wise and it's a win-win for humanity. Twitter has become a trigger-happy-people-fest because each group knows they can weaponize censorship against each other. With systems that are uncensored , nobody complaint…

All moderation is censorship, to some degree. Even a voting system like HN's has censorship-like qualities: it is specifically designed to make unpopular comments less visible than popular ones. And that is fine, I wouldn't want to only have forums or social media with zero moderation. Censorship only becomes a problem when it is _unavoidable_, that is, you cannot choose to live outside of some entity's censorship in…

i think there is a difference between suppression of minority opinions and censorship, which completely bans them. it depends on definition of course, but in its most common use, the word censorship is not subject to gradation

Re: Twitter funding a team to develop an open standard for social media

#263

Post by kick »

Arathorn wrote: post #222
kick wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Breaking out this sentence into blocks because it's very large.) The specification as-written is really, really bad (though I don't think this is a fault of the protocol), Synapse is kind of...and work on Dendrite seems to have mostly stalled, the billion people signed up on matrix.org has allowed for a sort of de facto centralization (not a huge problem, though in practice it sort of is, given how much the server b…

Thanks for answering. > The specification as-written is really, really bad We get a pretty wide range of feedback on the spec fwiw: some people seem to really like it. Others say that it’s “really, really bad” which doesn’t exactly give us much to go on... > Synapse is kind of... and Dendrite is stalled We have no choice but improve Synapse currently, and while it is still quite a resource hog it’s improved by at lea…

It looks like you guys are on the right path for most things, and I wish you luck!

Why do you have no choice but improve Synapse?

One of the reasons you seem to only get negative opinions along the lines of "really, really bad" is because "The way it's written is stylistically bad/unapproachable and an entirely different approach should probably be taken" is something that takes a few hours to diffuse into something useful, and not something most people really receive in a way that's productive. It takes a lot more effort to give truly constructive, workable criticism than expressing any sort of opinion, negative or positive.

Re: Twitter funding a team to develop an open standard for social media

#264

Post by pferde »

kick wrote: post #62
pferde wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please elaborate.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21763323

Thanks! This, and a few your other posts on this topic gave me some interesting things to think about and links to read.

Re: Twitter funding a team to develop an open standard for social media

#265

Post by larnmar »

ookdatnog wrote: post #203
buboard wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I m surprised every time i see people here asking for the evil that is censorship. Dorsey wants a decentralized system exactly because he won't be held liable for not censoring people. It makes sense business-wise and it's a win-win for humanity. Twitter has become a trigger-happy-people-fest because each group knows they can weaponize censorship against each other. With systems that are uncensored , nobody complaint…

All moderation is censorship, to some degree. Even a voting system like HN's has censorship-like qualities: it is specifically designed to make unpopular comments less visible than popular ones. And that is fine, I wouldn't want to only have forums or social media with zero moderation. Censorship only becomes a problem when it is _unavoidable_, that is, you cannot choose to live outside of some entity's censorship in…

I think censorship is no longer censorship when it happens purely on the client side, it’s just filtering. As long as the tweets all continue to exist out there somewhere, someone can write a client to display them.

This will, I predict, make a lot of people unhappy because “omg there are Nazi tweets on my blockchain” but personally I’m happy with it.

Re: Twitter funding a team to develop an open standard for social media

#266

Post by nielsbot »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #232
espadrine wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Three reasons why not: operational, business, and technical. Operational: they don’t control features; adding them by contributing to the standard would leak planned features, and without contributing, would be seen as embrace-extend-extinguish. Business: it would contribute work to their competitors. Technical: implementing global search on it is implausible.

This is doomed from the start, then. There’s no way for them to work on an open standard without leaking features or contributing work to their competitors.

The question is, is that really a problem?

Re: Twitter funding a team to develop an open standard for social media

#267

Post by neonate »

kick wrote: post #82

To those of you pushing for ActivityPub: Webber's trashed it (the initial author) and is working on a way to mitigate the problems of it by implementing incompatible changes, the biggest piece of software claiming to implement it doesn't even implement it (Mastodon), the only piece of software that stays semi-faithful is full of devs who hate it (Pleroma). AP is completely broken for anything but publicly-scoped cont…

He showed up here to dispute what you're saying: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21764564.

Re: Twitter funding a team to develop an open standard for social media

#269

Post by shmerl »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #232
espadrine wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Three reasons why not: operational, business, and technical. Operational: they don’t control features; adding them by contributing to the standard would leak planned features, and without contributing, would be seen as embrace-extend-extinguish. Business: it would contribute work to their competitors. Technical: implementing global search on it is implausible.

This is doomed from the start, then. There’s no way for them to work on an open standard without leaking features or contributing work to their competitors.

Indeed. If they aren't working on an open standard, what are they working on, and what's the point then? It won't solve any of the problems open standard is supposed to solve.
Post reply on HN