Salta al contenuto
Citiverse è uno spazio aperto a tutte le comunità. Se vuoi aprire un gruppo locale o una sezione per la tua organizzazione, puoi contattare gli amministratori: pagina dei contatti.

Why do we keep bringing this up?

  • If we want a better web, we have to stop pretending this is just about “bad tech companies doing bad things.” Of course, they are-that’s what capitalist incentives produce. The real question is: what are we doing differently?

    That means accepting some uncomfortable truths. The better path will be less convenient, at least at first. We will have to socially support things that used to look free on the #dotcons. Because the cost we didn’t want to face is simple: the #openweb was always going to be harder, someone has to:

    • run the servers
    • maintain the software
    • fund development
    • handle abuse, moderation, and #UX

    The fantasy wasn’t that this work didn’t exist. The fantasy was that the market – advertising – would cover it without consequences.

    In the current mess in tech paths, this becomes visible again. Bluesky and #ATproto keep getting lumped in with #ActivityPub under the easy label of “open protocols, yay”… but that’s just not true. Yes, they both sit in the #openweb space, but there’s a real structural problem here, and we’re seeing it play out in real time.

    At AtmosphereConf, the signal was stark:

    “Why would anyone fund an Atmosphere project if Bluesky, with $100 million in the bank, might ship a competing feature at any moment?”

    That’s not an ecosystem. That’s a platform with enough gravity to crush its own edges. And people are noticing. The old pattern is back:

    • invite the community in
    • let them build the value
    • then absorb and replace them

    Same playbook, again and again. It feels open – but the centre still holds the power. The same dynamic we saw with Twitter. The DNA is obvious.

    The difference really matters. #ActivityPub was built as a commons path from the start – messy, flawed, but natively open. #ATproto is something else: a platform-first model with openness layered on top. That’s why it keeps drifting this way. It’s not a bug, it’s the design.

    Too much #techshit, and everything starts to stink. Why would anyone step into the #openweb if that’s the smell? This creates a bigger problem, that it’s a mess that keeps coming back, and as usual we’ll be the ones left to compost it, underfunded, unrecorded, and unthanked.

    We’ve been here before – with the #encryptionists and the #blockchain mess. Big promises, lots of noise, overlapping hype cycles. Now there’s a clear overlap with #Bluesky and #AI. The risk isn’t just that this fails. It’s that when it fails, it leaves a miasma behind, making it harder for people to trust the actually working open paths. That’s the real damage.

    Neglect is not innocence, this isn’t about blaming users instead of power. Power matters. Monopolies matter. Venture capital mess matters. But still, if the #openweb mattered, why didn’t we support it?

    Why do people pay for streaming, cloud, and delivery, but not support publishing tools, independent media, hosting, or open infrastructure?

    Why did so many #NGO organisations that talked about openness still push people onto closed platforms the moment growth and analytics are on the table? We keep choosing short-term convenience over long-term stewardship, not just a market failure, a cultural one.

    So lets look at this mess again. I’ve been trying to find a way to express my view of the people who took over outreach in the #Fediverse, and in doing so helped shape the current #openweb reboot.

    DRAFT: naïve, controlling, and self-interested.

    They’ve left a mess that the people they pushed aside now have to compost. It’s really useful to look at how we got here.

    In the early years, outreach was organised by a genuinely diverse, native crew. It was a good time – three open conferences, and even getting the EU to adopt the standard. But that group burned out, focus splintered, self-interest crept in, driven by the need to control resources. The balance shifted, and grifters gradually outnumbered them, eventually tearing it apart. In the space left behind, a new crew stepped in – filling the vacuum with centralised power and influence. And that’s where we are today.

    We don’t fix this by arguing harder. We fix it by building – and holding – open spaces that don’t follow this pattern.

    It’s not about features. It’s about culture.

    #ActivityPub comes out of the #openweb tradition.

    #Bluesky comes out of a split lineage – #openweb roots, shaped by #dotcons incentives, with an #encryptionist upbringing.

  • If we want a better web, we have to stop pretending this is just about “bad tech companies doing bad things.” Of course, they are-that’s what capitalist incentives produce. The real question is: what are we doing differently?

    That means accepting some uncomfortable truths. The better path will be less convenient, at least at first. We will have to socially support things that used to look free on the #dotcons. Because the cost we didn’t want to face is simple: the #openweb was always going to be harder, someone has to:

    • run the servers
    • maintain the software
    • fund development
    • handle abuse, moderation, and #UX

    The fantasy wasn’t that this work didn’t exist. The fantasy was that the market – advertising – would cover it without consequences.

    In the current mess in tech paths, this becomes visible again. Bluesky and #ATproto keep getting lumped in with #ActivityPub under the easy label of “open protocols, yay”… but that’s just not true. Yes, they both sit in the #openweb space, but there’s a real structural problem here, and we’re seeing it play out in real time.

    At AtmosphereConf, the signal was stark:

    “Why would anyone fund an Atmosphere project if Bluesky, with $100 million in the bank, might ship a competing feature at any moment?”

    That’s not an ecosystem. That’s a platform with enough gravity to crush its own edges. And people are noticing. The old pattern is back:

    • invite the community in
    • let them build the value
    • then absorb and replace them

    Same playbook, again and again. It feels open – but the centre still holds the power. The same dynamic we saw with Twitter. The DNA is obvious.

    The difference really matters. #ActivityPub was built as a commons path from the start – messy, flawed, but natively open. #ATproto is something else: a platform-first model with openness layered on top. That’s why it keeps drifting this way. It’s not a bug, it’s the design.

    Too much #techshit, and everything starts to stink. Why would anyone step into the #openweb if that’s the smell? This creates a bigger problem, that it’s a mess that keeps coming back, and as usual we’ll be the ones left to compost it, underfunded, unrecorded, and unthanked.

    We’ve been here before – with the #encryptionists and the #blockchain mess. Big promises, lots of noise, overlapping hype cycles. Now there’s a clear overlap with #Bluesky and #AI. The risk isn’t just that this fails. It’s that when it fails, it leaves a miasma behind, making it harder for people to trust the actually working open paths. That’s the real damage.

    Neglect is not innocence, this isn’t about blaming users instead of power. Power matters. Monopolies matter. Venture capital mess matters. But still, if the #openweb mattered, why didn’t we support it?

    Why do people pay for streaming, cloud, and delivery, but not support publishing tools, independent media, hosting, or open infrastructure?

    Why did so many #NGO organisations that talked about openness still push people onto closed platforms the moment growth and analytics are on the table? We keep choosing short-term convenience over long-term stewardship, not just a market failure, a cultural one.

    So lets look at this mess again. I’ve been trying to find a way to express my view of the people who took over outreach in the #Fediverse, and in doing so helped shape the current #openweb reboot.

    DRAFT: naïve, controlling, and self-interested.

    They’ve left a mess that the people they pushed aside now have to compost. It’s really useful to look at how we got here.

    In the early years, outreach was organised by a genuinely diverse, native crew. It was a good time – three open conferences, and even getting the EU to adopt the standard. But that group burned out, focus splintered, self-interest crept in, driven by the need to control resources. The balance shifted, and grifters gradually outnumbered them, eventually tearing it apart. In the space left behind, a new crew stepped in – filling the vacuum with centralised power and influence. And that’s where we are today.

    We don’t fix this by arguing harder. We fix it by building – and holding – open spaces that don’t follow this pattern.

    It’s not about features. It’s about culture.

    #ActivityPub comes out of the #openweb tradition.

    #Bluesky comes out of a split lineage – #openweb roots, shaped by #dotcons incentives, with an #encryptionist upbringing.

    @info

    Very well said. Couldn't agree more. A wolf in sheep's clothing. A patina of 'open systems' over a solid $100M corporate core.

  • Say goodbye to Linked Data Signatures

    Mondo activitypub fedidev fep8b32
    6
    0 Votazioni
    6 Post
    0 Visualizzazioni
    julian@activitypub.spaceJ
    @jupiter_rowland@hub.netzgemeinde.eu and your point is? If they do it first subsequent implementations don't deserve recognition?
  • 0 Votazioni
    2 Post
    4 Visualizzazioni
    voltmor@mastodon.mlV
    I'm checking my client's functionality for Mastodon. This is a test message in the form of a response.
  • 1 Votazioni
    1 Post
    4 Visualizzazioni
    Nessuno ha risposto
  • 0 Votazioni
    1 Post
    0 Visualizzazioni
    Nessuno ha risposto
  • Week in Fediverse 2026-05-29

    General Discussion fediverse activitypub weekinfediverse
    1
    1 Votazioni
    1 Post
    16 Visualizzazioni
    Nessuno ha risposto
  • 1 Votazioni
    3 Post
    172 Visualizzazioni
    macfrancM
    @team@blog.purewebhosting.nz @gwilymgj@mastodon.social Standardising Public Information Publishing I think you should discuss this with the @swf@socialwebfoundation.org group. The issue of standardization is one of the most delicate in the relationship between the fediverse and the mastosphere, and will likely be resolved in different ways based on the so-called "doocracy." It will be important for it to adhere as closely as possible to W3C standards and be conceived in simple terms. Some platforms like Friendica have already solved the formatting of georeferencing and event data. (cc @heluecht@pirati.ca is right?) Should an entity run it’s own presence much like they run their own website or email? It depends a lot on the type of organization. A nonprofit organization could simply choose to be hosted by a federated social network in its own country. A public institution could do the same, but first consider opening a proprietary instance, since, depending on the institution's importance, the traffic flow could become problematic. A private company, on the other hand, has the obligation to create its own instance. If I were to manage an organization's faith migration, I would make these assessments by evaluating the TOSs of the instances in my country and, if I found one suitable, I would agree on my inclusion in advance with the instance administrators. I also remember that careful management of a federated WordPress or Ghost server is already an interesting solution, just as a federated NodeBB forum allows you to wonderfully control the moderation of your audience of interested users. Possible disadvantages Here we must be realistic: using commercial social media for your organization's communication is NEVER perceived as a problem! It will be difficult to obtain the exact costs of managing a social media account, and the employees (or vendors) who manage an organization's social media account are resistant to change. My advice is to find out in advance whether the organization already uses automated publishing systems, whether these systems include at least the Mastodon API, and whether these systems include engagement measurement systems; If they don't use automatic publishing, you can find a system that helps them manage everything more easily. I may be unpopular, but an organization shouldn't be forced to do without commercial social media! Any organization's social media strategy should have three ethical obligations: Maintain a presence on the most popular commercial social media platforms that are consistent with its audience, to ensure maximum reach. Maintain a presence on an open-source social network that allows users to follow the organization and interact with it without being tracked, profiled, or having their data transferred to problematic countries, because this is a guarantee for its customers/users. Prioritize communication on the open social network, publishing content on the federated account earlier and more carefully, and possibly attempting to move communication to the federated account.
  • 1 Votazioni
    9 Post
    59 Visualizzazioni
    grunfink@comam.esG
    Thank you so much!
  • 0 Votazioni
    2 Post
    25 Visualizzazioni
    ozoned@btfree.socialO
    @blog@shkspr.mobi Such a great read. Thank you for the thoroughness. I loved this. We need a new way to measure the #smallSocial effect. Right now people saw we fail because they only look at one platform. #BigTech had to invent "monthly active users" to help people understand their "value". They're trying to measure us the same, but we're nowhere near the same. We're an evolution and no one will ever truly know how many of us there are. So I beg folks, don't look at one or two or three instances and say that because some arbitrary number goes down that we're losing or dieing. No no no. We're growing and learning and finding ways that Big Tech NEVER wanted to exist. Just because they use a yard stick doesn't mean we need to be constrained by that. EVERYONE please keep up the incredible work. I'll fight for this the #restOfMyLife. How about all of you?<span class="invisible"> #RomL #smallSocial #smallWeb #fedi #Fediverse </span>

Citiverse è un progetto che si basa su NodeBB ed è federato! | Categorie federate | Chat | 📱 Installa web app o APK | 🧡 Donazioni | Privacy Policy

Il server utilizzato è quello di Webdock, in Danimarca. Se volete provarlo potete ottenere il 20% di sconto con questo link e noi riceveremo un aiuto sotto forma di credito da usare proprio per mantenere Citiverse.