https://kolektiva.social/@admin/110637031574056150
The #Fediverse is all #4opens so should not be used for anything that should be P2P encrypted. It’s important to keep this clear to users by not focused on the fig leaf of “hardening” security as the is non. It’s a very successful #OMN open media network, and it’s value lies in this.
Peoples pushing this are often not seeing the point that it’s designed #4opens this is why it works.
Both paths have value, but they are different.
And the push a different project (#4closes) which is fine. But not a #OMN maybe they would be better off working on bridges as companion projects.
Good to think about this mess they talk about as it is not solved by more tech we already have most of what we need.
* Open media is #4opens based on trust, the current ActivityPub is a relatively #KISS good example of this.
* Privacy is encrypted p2p chat, which the are meany good #UX mature #FOSS projects you can find
The change we need is social, getting people to use the different approaches for different needs, this is surprisingly difficult.
Bridges while dangerous are needed here, it’s good to talk about this in the sense of “security”.
https://newdesigncongress.org/en/pub/this-is-fine
This text reads like a vanguardists path, based on #mainstreaming reading and narrow #geekproblem thinking. It’s missing the paths that hold value in #4opens horizontal activist paths we are building. But yes, we are getting lost in the growing #fedivers and the wider spread of #openweb reboot diversity projects.
What it does highlight is the need for social and political thinking is needed, the is value there.
It’s hard to stress how “nave” meany devs on the #fedivers
#openweb #4opens is about building human trust, hard security is a very slightly overlapping but easy to see different path for building non “trust” based connections.
Some surprisingly hard to build bridges might help with this ongoing mess.
Can you see any of this feedback?
