A forum thread on socialhub brought up a powerful parallel between the radical demands of the Black Panther Party (#BPP) and the underlying values of the #fediverse and #activitypub communities, especially in their attempts to build outside the corporate-controlled paths. The metaphor is striking because both seek liberation, self-determination, and the creation of alternatives to oppressive systems.
Freedom and self-determination, the #BPP’s call for freedom to determine their community’s paths, has a native overlap to the motivations behind the fediverse, which is a path to free people from #dotcons corporate control. This empowering of people to manage their communities, and engage in social media on their own terms, much like the BPP sought to control their community’s political and social future. But there is a problem, this self-determination is undermined by the “narrow and intolerant” behaviour, in the fediverse communities which are still shaped by power dynamics, gatekeeping, and elitism. Much like the BPP’s fight against internal and external forces, we need to challenge invisible embedded paths in tech spaces.
Ending exploitation and economic Injustice, the BPP’s demand to end capitalist robbery mirrors the desire within the fediverse to reject the exploitative model of #dotcons, profiting off users’ data, labour, and attention. Projects like #Mastodon and the wider #openweb reboot offer an alternative that resists the centralization, monetization and control of user information. Yet, despite this anti-capitalist ethos, there’s still a tendency for devs and leaders in these communities to pursue funding, recognition and status that mimics the capitalist incentives of the #dotcons. The challenge is to remain vigilant about how easily a “safe” or “open” community can be co-opted by external economic pressures, just as the Panthers struggled to protect their movement from state infiltration and capitalist influence.
Housing, education, and technology as commons, the BPP’s demands for housing and education highlight their belief in basic human rights, which could be translated into the tech metaphor as the right to access technology and information as commons. The #4opens represent this principle, ensuring that tools, processes, and knowledge remain transparent and accessible. It’s about creating “decent housing” for digital life and an “education” that uncovers the true nature of our technological paths. The struggle, many open communities drift toward becoming insular, where the tools and education are not readily accessible to newcomers. It requires more effort to lower the barriers and broaden participation beyond the #geekproblem to genuinely serve as commons, much like the Panthers sought to broaden political education beyond academic elites.
Community defense and police brutality, the Panthers’ emphasis on ending police brutality and defending their community aligns with the need for safe spaces in the digital world, spaces free from corporate surveillance, trolling, and abuse. In the fediverse, moderation and safety tools resemble a kind of “community defense” against harmful actors, trying to keep the space healthy and productive. This policing of communities within the fediverse can take a rigid, intolerant form, which creates an exclusionary culture where non #mainstreaming voices are marginalized. Just as the Panthers sought accountability and fairness in how their communities were policed, Fediverse communities need more humane and community-led governance models, like #OGB, to avoid replicating the authoritarian systems they’re fighting against.
Radical ideals vs. narrow paths, both the BPP and the fediverse, in their own ways, strive for radical change, whether it’s systemic racial justice or the liberation of the internet from corporate interests. But both face the dilemma of narrow paths, in the BPP’s case, the movement’s radical vision was met with state repression, which forced them into narrower, defensive stances. In the fediverse, the movement for open, decentralized media is constrained by internal divisions, ideological rigidity, and an intolerance of diverse views. The key here is not to narrow the vision to protect it, but to expand it, making space for more people and voices. This means mediating conflicts through trust and transparency, rather than exclusion and elitism, a struggle shared by both the BPP and the #openweb movement.
The path forward, to “compost the mess” in the fediverse, we need to apply some of the same principles the BPP fought for, building movements that are rooted in collective empowerment, community defence, and transparent, accountable governance. This means, challenging the internal hierarchies that mirror the social structures we’re resisting. Expanding participation and avoiding the elitism and exclusionary paths that choke out growth. Emphasizing practical tools (like #OGB and #4opens) to manage conflicts, maintain openness, and ensure the tech commons remains genuinely for the people.
Looking at the #BPP’s history, we see both a radical vision and the internal/external challenges that can derail a movement. The fediverse can learn from this, the threat to its growth isn’t just external corporate forces, but the narrow, rigid paths it sometimes enforces within. To stay on the “native” path of liberation, it has to embrace messiness, diversity, and openness. The Panthers’ slogan “Power to the People” resonates deeply here, digital power should truly belong to the people, not gatekeepers.
Back then, we were teetering on the edge of a digital cliff, with the open internet hanging in the balance. There were two insightful perspectives capturing the crossroads we are at: Phil Windley argued that the open internet was a historical fluke, while Dave Winer suggests that what we were seeing was merely the ebb before the next wave of the #openweb arrived.
With this enclosure of the digital commons, #PhilWindley perspective, is a sobering one. Though he has updated his post, he used to see the internet early open nature as an anomaly—an accident of history. In this view, the open internet as we knew it is essentially finished. That once-thriving commons have been systematically enclosed by corporate silos—the #dotcons like Facebook, Google, and Amazon—that now dominate the digital landscape. What remains outside these silos is, according to this perspective, withering and dying. The vision of a decentralized, user-controlled internet has been overwhelmed by the centralized, profit-driven motives of these tech giants.
His argument is that decentralization is hard, perhaps too hard for most people to handle. This reality, combined with the fact that these silos provide convenience, user-friendliness, and perceived safety, has led people to choose them over the messy and challenging world of a truly #openweb. People have traded freedom for convenience, security for walled gardens, and the vibrant chaos of the commons for the curated safety of #dotcons. The digital commons have been enclosed, and it was a bleak view.
On the other side, Dave Winer offered a more hopeful perspective. He believes that the history of the internet and the web comes in waves—periods of openness followed by enclosure, which then recede to allow for another wave of openness. In his view, Phil Windley’s observation might not be wrong, but it’s not the end of the story. Rather, it’s the ebb of the tide before a new wave of the #openweb surges forward. The potential for decentralized, and open paths is always there, and it’s a mistake to assume that the current moment is the end of the line.
#DaveWiner argument rests on the idea that the desire for openness and freedom is cyclical. When centralized systems become oppressive, restrictive, or exploitative, there will be a counter-movement that pushes back. The nature of technology, innovation, and humanistic creativity ensures that “native” paths, and protocols will emerge to challenge the status quo.
There is a logic to the digitization of everything. The internet and #openweb built on top of it, is a living example of what happens when this logic is let loose: a tsunami that crashes over every part of our cultures, breaking old structures and opening up possibilities. The storm is not over. Just as the early web opened up commons that were later enclosed, the current wave of enclosure is broken by a new wave of #4open decentralization paths.
What Has Changed in the Last Decade? Looking back at what I wrote nearly ten years ago, the fundamental dynamics haven’t changed. The dotcons have only grown more powerful and more entrenched, but at the same time, the counter-forces have also begun to stir vigorously. Movements like the #Fediverse, based on #ActivityPub, #Nostor and to a lesser extent #Bluesky have grown into real usable decentralized social paths, together with this, we are dipping our toes back into peer-to-peer technologies, this wave is evidence that the storm of digitization is still alive.
Yes, the #dotcons did enclose the first wave of commons, when we stupidly took their digital algorithmic drugs. But the defences of the dotcons are very weak, the only thing holding most people is their addictions, nobody thinks they are healthy any more. The logic of digitization continues, and as long as there are waves, there is hope for the current openweb reboot.
The #Fediverse, short for Federated Universe, is a part of the #openweb made of human connections through #4opens computer networks. At best, its value is not a collection of software packages, much more about the flows of human community that build relationships across diverse groups and regions. Imagine the Fediverse as a web of communities, each represented as a node. These nodes are not defined by the software they use, but by the people and groups that form them:
Affinity Groups in Activism: communities of action and social movements
Local Governments: Municipalities using the Fediverse to communicate with residents, share public announcements, and gather feedback.
Universities: Academic institutions fostering collaboration among students, faculty, and researchers, enabling the sharing of resources and knowledge.
Families: Family members staying connected, sharing updates, photos, and maintaining family bonds regardless of geographical distances.
Friend Groups: Friends interacting and sharing moments in a private, ad-free space, organizing events, and maintaining their social ties.
Companies: Businesses collaborating internally and with their customers, providing customer support, and sharing company news.
Interests: People and communities expressing themselves, sharing their thoughts, hobbies, and connecting with like-minded individuals around the world.
These communities interact seamlessly across the #openweb, regardless of the specific codebase they grow in. Yes it’s important to understand the good #UX of the software that makes these connections possible plays a part, and that each of these nodes use a common protocol, #ActivityPub, to communicate, forming the backbone of “native” #openweb flows. This #4opens interoperability allows people on one codebase to interact with users on another, creating a unified, yet decentralized, social network.
“The Fediverse isn’t about connecting software packages. It’s about connecting communities and people. If you make a Fediverse explainer, try to show some real communities as the nodes in the network, rather than using software packages and their logos. Companies, local governments, universities, families, friend groups, individuals. You can explain what software makes those networks possible in your next slide.” https://mastodon.social/deck/@evan@cosocial.ca/112847724644046695
Though, what meany in our #fashernista and #geekproblem paths miss is this thrives because of the human element. It’s about the people who use these platforms to connect, share, and build spaces that reflect their values and needs. It’s the people and the communities of use that make this real, let’s talk about them #KISS
We have an undeclared #stupidindividualism battle pushing to destroy this in numerous ways, we do need to push this back, while holding out a hand to bring people over. Yes it a step, don’t be scared.
Let’s look at this “#branding” issue. The tech world is changing as there is a #reboot of the #openweb happening, yes a lot of people don’t see this, so worth talking about a bit. If you are interested in this subject, every day you likely hear another big player joining the #fediverse. What does that mean? It is not complex, there is a chance you are already on this path, if you are on #dotcons sites like #meta#Threads or #WordPress etc.
It’s actually something we already know about, a network of websites that interact with each other through a shared protocol, just like #email has worked for the last 50 years. The term #Fediverse is a mash-up of two words: federate and universe. To federate means to form an alliance, so the Fediverse is an alliance of websites or apps that federate content with each other. It’s a federated universe, a part of the #openweb we all grew up on if we are over our teenage years.
This network is decentralized, meaning no #dotcons controls it, people and communities have control over their information, news and data flows. While most are run by communities and individuals, a few are run by corporations. Some may have thousands of users, while others have just a few.
Each of these websites has their own myths and traditions to shape their local feeds, but people on one site can easily interact with people on another site because they’re using the same protocol, an open-source tool that connects websites into a “native” #openweb global network. How Does It Work? The protocol is called #ActivityPub, which you might’ve heard of because it powers apps like Mastodon. But it also powers #Peertube, #Pixelfed, #Lemmy, and our own #OMN etc, and even the #dotcons are sharing this space, with #meta’s #Threads. It’s extremely popular. When you publish a post on your website, it gets federated to all the people who follow you on other websites that are based on this protocol. They can like, share, or comment on your posts. That’s the path of federation and what the #4opens #openweb is about https://fediverse.party/en/miscellaneous/
The #4opens process that governs the culture of this path is simple in abstract, If the website admins notice a ton of spam coming from another website, they can either block that individual user or they can block that whole website. If that server is sending too much spam, it’s a problematic server. You can defederate from that server so you’re no longer hit with spam until they clean up their act. This is a horizontal path of how moderation works on this path, it works as an individual and as a community.
Like email, when the first thing you do is pick a username that’s available on that website. To do this, find a site that fits your interest, pick a username that’s available on that server. Your Fediverse handle is going to look like an email address: It’s going to be username@server, for example info@hamishcampbell.com for this blog’s #ActivityPub feed.
When I talk to people about the #openweb or mention the #Fediverse, I have to talk about #Mastodon for them to get an understanding on the subject, this is a non-native issue, thus the need for this blog post to try and fix this blindness. While Mastodon is a decentralized microblogging platform similar to Twitter. If you’re looking for a Twitter alternative, this is probably the one you’ve heard of. It’s one of the largest applications on the Fediverse. But Mastodon is not the Fediverse https://fediverse.observer/map look wider there are meany interesting projects.
The original #Indymedia network was a vibrant platform for decentralized grassroots media. It gave voice to those ignored by corporate media and built a culture of open publishing and collaboration. But over time it succumbed to both internal and external pressures.
Why reboot #Indymedia now? And how can we spread the understanding of why we need to do this. But, before we can revive the project, we need to face those failures honestly – and learn from them.
Why did Indymedia decline?
Internal conflicts – tribalism, ego, and power politics fractured unity.
Divergent visions – competing goals and methods led to fragmentation.
External pressures – surveillance, repression, and legal harassment weakened the network.
Technological change – rapid shifts in digital media outpaced Indymedia’s adaptability.
Sustainability problems – financial and operational support was always fragile.
Centralization vs. decentralization – endless tension between autonomy and coherence sapped energy.
These dynamics weren’t unique to Indymedia. They mirror the wider decline of radical alt-media in the face of #dotcons and the #deathcult of neoliberal “common sense.” So what is #IndymediaBack? It’s a project about rekindling what worked while composting what didn’t. It is rooted in the principles that once made Indymedia a powerful force:
Trust-based publishing
Do-ocracy
Anti-authoritarianism
But this time, we pair those values with modern tools and lessons learned.
The role of #OMN framework is central to this reboot. It brings with it:
Re-establish open publishing flows – grassroots publishing, ensuring diverse voices are heard.
Strengthen decentralized structures – prevent power concentration while empowering local autonomy.
Implement modern standards – adopt protocols like #ActivityPub to improve functionality and widen news flows.
Avoid past mistakes – use clear governance and messy consensus to counter tribalism and power politics.
Promote sustainability – develop financial and operational models that keep the network alive long-term.
Strategies for Revival:
Adopt a #NothingNew policy – stick to the original workflows and ethos, but update them to meet today’s realities.
Build affinity groups – working groups to tackle specific issues and reach consensus on direction.
Emphasize the #4opens – open source, open data, open standards, open processes — to guarantee transparency and inclusivity.
Expected Outcomes:
A resilient and inclusive network of sites – decentralized and open, able to withstand pressures from within and without.
Diverse, vibrant media content – a rich tapestry of perspectives beyond the mainstream.
Sustainable operations – financial and organizational resilience to endure over time.
Community-driven governance – messy consensus and grassroots decision-making, not top-down control.
Conclusion, this is not just about restoring what was lost. It is about composting the failures and growing something new, a living network that can adapt to future challenges while staying true to its radical, open, grassroots beginnings.
This is from the view of progressive, grassroots and Alt media in the UK:
Silo, definition: Closed data systems hoarding information. Impact: Data vanishes when projects end, diminishing the effectiveness of alternative media. Most alt/grassroots media projects are silos, capturing data without open licensing for reuse.
Portal, definition: Attempts to be the dominant site, locking users into their ecosystem. Impact: Builds projects that trap users, contrary to the #openweb’s logic. In alt/grassroots media, this resembles a one-party state approach of the 20th century.
#Dotcons, definition: For-profit data silos and pseudo-networked portals. Impact: Many alt media projects mimic #dotcons, aspiring to their closed models.
Link, definition: Fundamental to the #openweb, giving content value. Impact: The absence of linking in alt media reduces the content’s value.
#Activitypub, definition: is a protocol and open standard for decentralized networking, a tool for commons building. Impact: this is growing in use.
#RSS, definition: An open web standard that adds value through data sharing. Impact: RSS is underutilized in alt media, overshadowed by silo and portal models.
Geek Culture, definition: A subculture focused on control and technical solutions. Impact: Often closes open projects, contributing to the failure of alt media initiatives, ca use the hashtag #geekproblem
#Fashionista Culture, definition: An unthinking pursuit of innovation and conformity. Impact: Churns through alt/grassroots projects, preventing them from growing.
#NGO, definition: Bureaucratic entities consuming resources. Impact: Push agendas that overshadow grassroots initiatives, often invisibly counterproductive.
Network, definition: Both technical (wires, frequencies) and mutual aid (diversity of strategy). Impact: Essential for alt media but underutilized.
#4opens, definition: Open source, open data, open standards, open process. Impact: Exemplified by projects like Wikipedia; foundational to just and effective media projects.
To sum, up, we are still in the process of moving away from the mess of most UK alt/grassroots media projects, who are focused on silos, on capturing data and users rather than linking and sharing to build commons. Emphasizing the #4opens and fostering a culture of linking and openness help’s to break this cycle and build a more interconnected and effective alternative media landscape.
Design for Abuse: The #AP protocol is vulnerable to abuse, particularly in terms of Distributed Denial of Service (#DDOS) attacks.
Push-Based Model: The push-based notification model leads to overloading servers, especially when a popular account generates a large amount of activity.
Harassment Concerns: There is a perceived inadequacy in control issues to address the worry of harassment, with issues like the inability to disable replies not being implemented.
Need for Defensive Model: A #geekproblem call for abandoning the working “native” #openweb path and push a “native” #closedweb path, with a complete overhaul of the protocol to incorporate defensive measures from the outset.
The Critique
From an #openweb and #4opens perspective, the critique highlights a different mindset that is clearly incompatible with the current path. But yes, there are questions about the balance between openness and security. Let’s not get lost in the #geekproblem and look at them:
Design for Abuse
Critique: The assertion that the protocol is designed for abuse is an overstatement, but it highlights genuine vulnerabilities. The open “trust” based nature of #ActivityPub and the #Fediverse, promotes decentralization and federation, but can indeed be exploited by malicious actors, people do brake “trust”. Transparency in code is crucial. Vulnerabilities should be openly discussed and addressed through community collaboration, most can be fixed by social norms rather than hardcoding. Data sharing is core, there should be as little as possible “private data” to abuse. Protocols should work with slow revisions to improved community feedback. Decision-making processes around security, should be based on social rather than coding, #openprocess is a core part of this.
Push-Based Model
Critique : The push-based model can indeed lead to server overloads. Popular accounts generating a lot of traffic can unintentionally cause DDOS-like situations. This is a normal lossy part of the “native” #openweb, we should work on this. Implementing caching strategies and lossy notification systems should be developed and tested within the community. Efficient data handling techniques should balance ease of hosting and speed of application, with ease of hosting first. Exploring hybrid models (push/pull) with RSS backup can lead to more resilient protocols use. Real time is less important than the app keeps working. Part of this is about ensuring that changes to the protocol are hard and slow, with debate and consensus.
Harassment Concerns
Critique : The constant talking about harassment tools and features such as disabling replies is a concern. Yes open networks are just that open, it’s the social norms of federation that make them a safe space, we need to build up our communes of trust. Developing robust moderation tools and anti-harassment features should balance with building strong social instances, who in the end do the work, be very careful of #closedweb paths in coding these features. Socialise data on harassment patterns helps to improve trust based moderation tools. The stories we tell and the way we work for moderation and anti-abuse measures should be developed collaboratively. Including diverse voices in the social decision-making process for instances is crucial.
Need for Defensive Model
Critique: Starting with a defensive model is the wrong path. Many security and abuse issues can be mitigated with a trust-first approach. A good culture should be built into the core from the beginning, with active community involvement. Developing norms of behaver through community consensus helps build a more resilient system.
Conclusion
The #closedweb path tries to raise points about vulnerabilities and shortcomings of the current #ActivityPub and #Mastodon implementations. From an #openweb and #4opens perspective, the solution lies not in suggesting we abandon the native path and implemented protocol but in addressing these issues through open, collaborative, and transparent social processes. By leveraging the strengths of the #4opens framework, the community can work to create resilient, and user-friendly networks that are already on the successful native #openweb path.
The term #openweb describes a social ecosystem for the internet rooted in decentralization, interoperability, and community-driven values. It embodies the #4opens principles – open data, open source, open standards, and open process. This stands in contrast to the #dotcons, whose platforms are centralized and proprietary, and the broader #mainstreaming of the internet, which has a strong tendency to replicate closed, corporate models. The #openweb offers a fundamentally different vision for the future, both for the web and the society it shapes.
In this landscape, the #Fediverse refers to an example of decentralized networking. Built on the interoperable protocol #ActivityPub, it enables people and communities across different platforms to interact seamlessly. Codebases like #Mastodon, #PeerTube, and #Pixelfed serve as practical alternatives to corporate platforms like Twitter, YouTube, and Instagram, offering a more ethical, people-centric path for people to walk.
For more technical or geeky conversations, the term #web1.5 is useful. It acts as a buffer against the confusion and hype of #web3 and the #encryptionist obsession with blockchain-driven solutions that miss the social dimension.
When communicating with broader or more mainstream people, talking about the Fediverse can be tricky. In many cases, simply saying “Mastodon” is enough. As the most recognizable platform in the Fediverse, it serves as a useful gateway for those unfamiliar with decentralized technologies, yet curious to explore alternatives to Big Tech.
Ultimately, terminology should match context and audience. Whether you’re deep in conversation with fellow geeks or introducing someone new to decentralized spaces, choosing the right term can make all the difference in clarity and accessibility.
Of course, tribalism within these communities can sometimes make things harder than necessary. A gentle reminder applies here: don’t be a prat. Shared understanding matters more than gatekeeping.
Pushing defederation from #meta is not wrong in sentiment, the #dotcons are vile and cons. But is wrong from a practical sense. The #Fediverse and #ActivityPub are #openweb based on #4opens, this is a space where you do not have technical tools for stopping the #dotcons from taking the data, as the data in the end is in the open, unencrypted, in the database, in #RSS and in open flows.
The people who push the idea of closed are fighting for the #closedweb on a “native” #openweb platform. This makes no sense at all, incoherences everywhere, a lot of mess over the last 40 years that we need to compost.
There are likely good, useful motivation for unfederating from the #dotcons let’s be motivated by them please.
One thing that is missing from much of the unthinking #mainstreaming outreach and expansion is that the history of #ActivityPub and the #Fediverse is a grassroots collaboration, and an ongoing struggle between open and closed paths. To understand this history, we need to explore the origins of ActivityPub and its evolution within the broader #openweb movement.
ActivityPub emerged as a response to the limitations of early social media protocols like #OStatus, which powered platforms such as #StatusNet (later GNU-social). While OStatus enabled some level of federation, it lacked robust privacy features and limited conversation dynamics. This pushed developers to seek alternatives that could better support native social interactions.
The early drafts of ActivityPub, initially called #ActivityPump, were an ambitious attempt to build a flexible protocol supporting rich, decentralized communication. In tech OStatus, used XML, ActivityPump adopted JSON, a more modern, lightweight, and developer-friendly format. This shift made it easier for platforms to adopt and extend the protocol.
The transition to ActivityPub, the move from ActivityStreams 1.0 to ActivityStreams 2.0, and ultimately to ActivityPub, reflected the need for a more comprehensive standard. ActivityPub introduced server-to-server communication, enabling platforms to share activities, like posts and follows, across different instances. This innovation laid the foundation for true federation, where separate platforms could interact seamlessly.
Key projects helped shape this evolution. Pump.io, created by #EvanProdromou (the developer behind StatusNet), was an early experiment with ActivityStreams, though it never achieved widespread adoption. But these experiments were stepping stones that informed the development.
Next is the role of #Mastodon and the rise of the #Fediverse, Eugen Rochko’s decision to implement ActivityPub as Mastodon’s primary protocol catalyzed the growth of the Fediverse. Mastodon offered a #openweb “native” but familiar Twitter-like experience with federation baked in, its rise attracted a wave of people disillusioned by #dotcons social media.
As Mastodon grew, other platforms joined the ecosystem, #PeerTube for video, #Pixelfed for images, #WriteFreely for blogging, and meany more. Each new platform enriched the Fediverse and reinforced the strength of the decentralized path.
There are challenges to openness, despite its successes, this journey of rebooting the #openweb with ActivityPub and the Fediverse hasn’t been without friction:
Commercial Capture: As the Fediverse gained traction, larger players began exploring it. #Threads’ integration with ActivityPub, for instance, raises concerns about whether the #dotcons might dilute the Fediverse’s grassroots ethos.
Technical Complexity: Implementing ActivityPub isn’t straightforward. the pushing of features like HTTP signatures for verifying interactions introduce technical hurdles that can create compatibility issues between platforms.
Centralization Drift: Even within the Fediverse, centralizing tendencies continue. Mastodon’s continuing dominance has concentrated influence, raising questions about how to prevent decentralized paths from replicating the “common sense” patterns of the #dotcons.
There is a constant need for guarding this open future, in which we need to balance the outreaching to the #mainstreaming with caring and supporting the native grassroots that created the value in the first place.
Looking forward, the future of ActivityPub and the Fediverse hinges on collective action. We need to resist the “common sense” commercial co-option from both friends and enemies to expand into building tools that make decentralized tech more accessible #OMN
The promise of the #Fediverse isn’t simply technological, it’s cultural and political. It’s about reclaiming the internet as public commons, where communities thrive on their own terms. On this path, by staying rooted in collaboration and community care, we ensure the Fediverse remains a beacon of hope in increasingly enclosed digital paths.
Funding application for the #OMN (Open Media Networking) project, an innovative initiative to revolutionize the landscape of media and communication. The project address the limitations and challenges posed by centralized social networks by developing an interconnected network that empowers people, fosters innovation, and promotes openness and decentralization.
What do you think about/Have you heard about project X? We are always interested in learning about other projects that aim to address similar challenges in the media landscape. Collaboration and cooperation are crucial in achieving the collective goal of creating a better internet and society.
Who are your competitors? While established networks like Facebook, Youtube, and Twitter are perceived as competitors, we view them as irrelevant, techshit to be composted. Cooperation partners are other decentralization efforts such as #ActivityPub etc. are also projects we aim to reach compatibility with.
How will you attract your first users? We plan to attract our first crew through various strategies, including leveraging the advantages of our system, collaborating with “content creators” and “influencers”, fostering change and linking, through leveraging our network of contacts.
Which programming language do you use? Our team has primarily engaged with the XXXX framework. However, we plan to explore existing open-source solutions in social networking to ensure compatibility with various technologies.
Who are potential users? Potential users of #OMN include social activists, frustrated users overwhelmed with managing multiple accounts, power users seeking greater control over their online presence, content creators and journalists, users with specific needs, decentralization enthusiasts, and anyone interested in an alternative to centralized networks.
How does #OMN make the internet more awesome?#OMN empowers people by offering them the freedom to choose their networks and applications freely, fostering fairness, promoting independent media, fostering creativity, and enhancing the peoples experience.
What are you building? We are building a new media experience that allows people to interact with different networks and applications seamlessly, offering greater flexibility and control over their society and local communertys.
Why do you want to bring micropayments to social media? Microgifts are essential for supporting community creators and networks, empowering people to support those they trust and enjoy with minimal effort.
What are the goals of #OMN? The goals of #OMN are to empower people and communertys, foster effectiveness in competition to #mainstreaming “common sense”, promote independent media, and enhance change and challenge in the communication space.
What does success look like? Success for #OMN includes the development of a working prototype, collaboration with various networks and applications, and widespread adoption of the #openweb “native” #OMN protocol and working practices as an internet/social standard.
What are the key deliverables of the prototyping phase? The key deliverables of the prototyping phase include the development of the #OMN#p2p client, User self-hosting, and Networks & Network Server prototypes, along with detailed documentation for developers and communertys.
Who will do the work? Our team, consisting of dedicated people committed to the vision of the #openweb, will primarily handle the work. With funding available, we plan to expand the team to expedite the prototyping phase.
What needs to be done now? We need funding support to commence the development of the prototype and advance the #OMN project to the next stage. This includes development, coordination, collaboration, and public outreach efforts.
How are you licensing any software or documentation you produce? We intend to make all our software openly available, encouraging collaboration and innovation in the open-source community.
How do you communicate publicly about your work? We communicate publicly through various channels, including videos, direct outreach to journalists and content creators, and engagement on media platforms like Mastodon and the #dotcons.
What do you hope to learn during the project? Throughout the project, we hope to learn about community project coordination, software collaboration, public outreach, software technologies, and other relevant fields, ultimately contributing to peoples growth and success.
What happens to #OMN if it does not get funded? If #OMN does not receive funding, we will continue our efforts to raise awareness and support for the project, confident in its value and potential impact on the communication landscape.
Thank you for considering our funding application for the #OMN project. We are excited about the opportunity to bring this “native” #openweb vision to life and look forward to the possibility of collaborating with you.
#P2P projects keep failing socially because adoption is tiny. The #Fediverse succeeds socially because it keeps social #UX familiar. The path forward is a half-step strategy: bridge #fediverse + #p2p in real, usable ways until decentralised clients are socially relevant.
We need: Bridges & killer apps, seamless UX that makes federated + p2p content feel like one stream. A server that reads from both channels without making the user care about protocols.
A. what is happening with protocols:
* The #nostr crew are the children of #web3 mess, they are a bit reformed, let’s see. * Then the #BlueSky are the reformed children of the #dotcons * The #fediverse is the child of the #openweb * #dat is a child of the #geekproblem if it is reformed or not, you can maybe tell me? * #SSB was a wild child, now sickly/lonely with the #fashionable kids gathering round #nostr * #p2p was the poster child of the era of the #openweb it was caught in the quicksand of legal issues, the shadow that was left was eclipsed by “free to use” #dotcons Now finds it hard to come back due to mobile devices not having an IP address, thus most people not actually able to use p2p reliably.
Q. ssb has technical shortcomings. It cant sparsely replicate data and verify it. It needs to download all data ever created by a user to verify, which makes it infeasible for many use cases. The main underlying data format is also hard to fix and leads to performance bottlenecks. The main founder moved on and it seems most ssb people are also looking for a new home. dat’s time has not yet started as it approached things from a much more fundamental perspective. The initial vision was “git for any kind of data”, which means “version control for any kind of data” (peer to peer). The stack only now reached maturity to build proper tools on top of it. You have the dat-ecosystem with 2-3 dozen projects. You have the holepunch/pears project which built a phenomenal “never on a server” desktop/mobile p2p video conferencing messenger with built in file sharing. The app works flawless on mobile and is called https://keet.io Also https://dat-ecosystem.org just now released it’s new website. The https://pears.com runtime will be live in 5 days from now on the 14th of February for anyone to start hacking on p2p apps and some time later, the plan is to integrate it into the dat-ecosystem website, so anyone can start using p2p from within dat-cosystem page (which is an open source static website anyone can fork to get to the same) …no back ends required. pears 🍐will only start working on the 14th of february. You can set a reminder. The revolution starts then 🙂
A. will have a look, there are a few new #p2p projects reaching use at mo – the issue is none of them link to each other and likely thus non inter-op. This is the #geekproblem
Q. I don’t think there are any mature projects out there other than dat and ipfs. The former made by open source devs, self funded with a bit of help from public funding bodies, while the latter is the poster child of venture capitalists and got gazillions from investors. It’s the “big tech” of p2p. Then you have a few less general purpose p2p projects which popped into existence in the last few years, but both dat and ipfs go back all the way to 2013 and it takes a lot to get things smooth and stable and support all use cases and get enough critical adoption and nodes to make the p2p network work. That is why dat-ecosystem has a lot of existing projects that work and why it is reliable to build on top of it. I do think the new more recent p2p projects in research state might become mature as well, but it will easily take them a few more years. Many of those newer projects have people working on them part time only or focus on really special use cases and only time will tell if their approaches will bring something new to the table or not. 2024 will definitely be the year of dat, especially after February 14th, when pears.com goes live. This has been years in the making. What started 2013 as (git for data) will now finally become it’s own independent p2p runtime. Goodbye nodejs & co. …and soon goodbye github & npm 🙂
A. https://holepunch.to/ its a very sparse website with no company info or #4opens process – it looks and feels like meany #dotcons if these projects do not link to each other or inter-op then they will fail like the hundreds I have seen fail over the last 20 years of this mess making. it’s a problem we can’t keep doing this shit, but we do. #4opens is a shovel to help compost this, can you do a write-up for these projects please.
Q. dat-ecosystem is a 501c3 It’s Code for Science and Society And it is https://opencollective.com/dat And it is governed by a Manifesto. It is all on the website next to the “Info” button in the upper left corner. If you mean pears.com ….that will change on February 14th I didn’t mention holepunch. Holepunch is just one of the many dat-ecosystem projects. It is special, because one of the core developers of dat started it after he got a lot of funding and is currently maintaining many of the important code that powers dat and the dat-ecosystem projects. But it doesn’t matter too much. The stack is open source under MIT and Apache 2.0 License for anyone to use. If holepunch would ever decide to stop maintaining the stack (which we do not think), dat-ecosystem can find other maintainers.
A. they are the owners of https://keet.io always look for ownership in #dotcons 🙂 a few of the ones I have been looking at over the last few years https://www.eff.org/deep…/2023/12/meet-spritely-and-veilid and the was a another one funded by NLNET they recently whent live, but can’t find the link. None of them link or interop, not even bridges. This is the #geekproblem
Q. Spritely is a great project. It embraces the ocap security model (Object Capabilities). It does apply it in lisp/scheme, which is a great fit with GNU Guix. Their foundation is led by Randy Farmer. Randy Farmer co-created Habitat with Chip Morningstar (an MMORPG) in the 1980s. Chip Morningstar works with Mark Miller (Mentor of Christine Lemmer Webber). Their project is called “Agoric”, which is a blockchain projcet funded by Salesforce. They have their own Token and build a “Market Place”. They as well work with ocap security model (but in JavaScript). The JavaScript ocap version is what is known as SES and Endojs. They regularly talk to make sure things are interoperable. Ocap security is also what dat-ecosystem is embracing to pair it with peer to peer and bring it to the post-web. A version of the web not dominated anymore by big tech and big standard bodies.
#Veilid is a young and interesting project as well with a focus on anonymity over performance. This is a great use case that needs support, but dat was always about performance and any size of data and anonymity and privacy at all costs. I’m not saying that is an unimportant use case, but there are plenty of solutions for extreme cases where anonymity and privacy are at utmost importance. What is vastly more important imho is to have a p2p technology able to replace mainstream big tech services such as youtube, facebook, instagram, tiktok, google & co. because it won’t help us if we have a special niche technology that cant actually tackle big tech and surveillance capitalism but gives people some way to hide from it. …we need it too, but we also need a foundation on which to actually outcompete big tech imho.
Keet is a closed source peer to peer messenger & video conferencing app (might be open source in the future) and it is built on top of the dat stack. The dat stack is very modular and in it’s core consists of a few main modules. – hypercore, hyprebee & hyperdrive – hyperdht & hyperswarm – autobase Those modules are maintained by holepunch, an organisation started by one of the core dat developers afte rreceiving a lot of funding to develop keet and now the pear runtime, which will be open source and public under https://pears.com after February 14th 2024 (Valentine’s Day ❤) Keet itself is one of many apps, all part of the dat-ecosystem. Most projects are open source, but not all, but they are all built on top of the MIT/Apache licenses p2p stack, which started as `dat` in 2013 and matured many years ago. The stack is battle tested and really works. Of course – we all want everything open source and one day we might find a model, but if some closed source apps help bring in funding, it benefits the open source core. Basically, you can think of “keet” as some fancy UI/UX on top of the open source software stack. Now sure – would be sweet if the UI/UX was open source as well, but then again, it’s not essential and until we transition into fully automated luxury Communism or whatever else works, something pays the bills and enables the open source core to be maintained 🙂 At least it works without any “Cloud Landlords”. No servers, never on a server. No more cloud lords, a.k.a. Big Tech or #dotcons
A. The best we have currently is #ActivityPub DIY federated – this is community based (but fails in code to actually be this) which in meany ways is complemtery to #p2p based approaches – they are better together and if the can bridge or interop this is MUCH better, the #OMN is native to this.
Q. Yes. dat is very low level. It would be cool to see somebody implement an activity pub based tool on top of it. One dat-ecosystem project did it for nostr, but no activity pub yet. I’m personally more interested into a desktop, terminal, version controlled data and software packages. “Social” tools are just one type of tools to built on top of the more fundamental p2p network and p2p system infrastructure. I do think dat is good for laying these foundations, but “social” tools are a layer that dat as a stack will probably never focus on, but instead dat-ecosystem projects will hopefully take on that challenge 🙂
A. Some people are community based federated (the start of this conversation) others are individual, the #p2p world you talk about. This is not a fight they are both valid. As you say what we don’t won’t is more #dotcons 🙂 Good conversation on the state of #p2p I used to be much more involved in this side, but it failed with the move to #dotcons so got re-engaged when ActivityPub came alone the rebooting of web 1.5 😉 are you happy for me to copy this to my blog, can credit you or just use AQ anonymous format?
Q. any way you want. I dont think p2p has failed. the p2p of the past was naive kids playing and it took a decade of adults and all the law enforcement they had at their disposal to bring it down and despite that torrents still run and even the piratebay continues to operate, although heavily censored. Back then it was a few devs and a majority of users. This time p2p is back and will enter mainstream open source developers after February 14th 2024 (5 days now). This empowers an entire generation and anyone who wants to dive into p2p to build any kind of tool. What was once hard and reserved to a few will be available to everyone. We might see another nodejs/npm movement. It loads a bit slow, but load this and check “all time” This is the largest open source ecosystem humanity has ever experienced. http://www.modulecounts.com/ And while npm/github have been hijacked by microsoft, we will claw it all back soon Btw. regarding Spritely and the backstory behind OCap, even though extremely technical in description, here is a summary of the work by Mark Miller et. al. https://erights.org/history/index.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_S._Miller > Miller has returned to this issue repeatedly since the Agoric Open Systems Papers from 1988 Mark Miller is Christine Lemmer Webbers Mentor. He works with Chip Morningstar (who with Randy Farmer did Habitat in the 80s) Randy Farmer is Executive Director of the Spritely Institute. Agoric is the Cosmos Framework based Blockchain now. https://agoric.com/team
A. Interesting to look back at all this stuff, reminds me I had dinner with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Nelson in Oxford 20 years ago, he was a little eccentric with a clip on digital recording device, every convention had to be record. good to catch up with history https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-t405_JAJA that is more relevant today.
Q. Yes – peer to peer is hard. Not as a user, it is actually easy enough, but as a developer. Building p2p is not taught anywhere and there aren’t online learning resources the same way you can learn how to set up your react app, etc… This will change after February 14th 2024 when the pears.com runtime is released. It is powered by the same p2p stack that developed with dat since 2013. If anyone of you is a developer or has friends who are, you are all invited to dip your toes into the dat water 😛 …and start a new p2p project and join the dat-ecosystem 🙂 It will get quite easy in 4 days from now and it will again get a lot easier in the coming weeks when more examples and docs are publishes and others build as well. The Storyline around Mark Miller, Randy Farmer & Chip Morningstar is totally separate from it, but it is also important, because it is what powers 1. the Spritely project and Christine Lemmer Webber 2. the Agoric Blockchain Project backed by Salesforce 3. the Ethereum Metamask Wallet and Co. It also influences the big standards bodies and I see it two fold. It’s a story about philosophy, values and vision driven by the specific people in it. It is also a story about “object capabilities” which is a powerful perspective on security and will enable and inform a lot of p2p interaction which without would require some sort of centralized servers, but with ocap can do it on it’s own p2p
A lightly edited conversation between Hamish Campbell (A) and Alexander Praetorius (Q)
