I saw this in another thread on /c/Showerthoughts. I think it’s important for this to be circulated widely so that the broader Fediverse community is aligned. We don’t want admins second-guessing their decisions when users start infighting. We should be united in our thinking and ready to protect our platform.
Here is a GPT4 tldr summary, and thoughts on how to avoid this from happening to us:
Summary:
The Fediverse is a decentralized network of servers communicating through the ActivityPub protocol.
Large corporations like Google and Microsoft have a history of either trying to control or make decentralized networks irrelevant.
Google joined the XMPP federation initially but implemented their own closed version, causing compatibility issues and slowing down the development of XMPP.
Eventually, Google stopped federating with other XMPP servers, leading to a decline in XMPP’s popularity and growth.
Microsoft used similar tactics to hinder competing projects, such as the Samba network file system and open source office suites like OpenOffice and LibreOffice.
The strategy involves extending protocols or developing new ones to deny entry to open source projects.
Proprietary formats and complicated specifications are used to maintain dominance in markets.
Meta’s potential entry into the Fediverse raises concerns as it could lead to fragmentation and a loss of freedom.
The Fediverse should focus on its values of freedom, ethics, and non-commercialism to avoid being co-opted by large corporations.
How a new federated decentralized platform can avoid this fate:
Stay true to the principles: The platform should prioritize and uphold the values of freedom, openness, and decentralization.
Develop open and robust protocols: Use open standards and ensure the protocol’s specifications are transparent, well-documented, and not controlled by a single entity.
Foster a strong community: Encourage collaboration, participation, and diversity within the community to avoid reliance on any single company or organization.
Emphasize user control: Give users control over their data and privacy, allowing them to choose which servers and communities to join and ensuring their content is not subject to corporate surveillance.
Focus on user experience: Create a user-friendly interface and provide features that attract and retain users, making it easy for them to engage and connect with others.
Avoid centralization of power: Design the platform in a way that distributes authority and influence across the network, preventing any single entity from gaining too much control.
Promote interoperability: Support compatibility with other decentralized platforms and protocols to encourage communication and collaboration across different networks.
Educate and raise awareness: Educate users about the benefits of decentralized platforms, the risks of centralized control, and the importance of supporting independent, community-driven initiatives.
By following these principles, a new federated decentralized platform can strive to maintain its integrity, preserve user freedom, and resist the influence of large corporations seeking to control or make it irrelevant.
Ugh, I came into this thread with the argument that we should be inclusive to other platforms, but you’re right and you’ve changed my view.
These companies do have a habit of open source capture and then killing them. I’m sure they would have made sending an email cost a stamp if they would have been mature enough at the time.
I don’t want capture to happen to this great little platform here, but I also don’t want the developers and admins to get jaded either. We’re going to need to find some way to incentivize the folks that are willing to sacrifice their time and resources to keep this going.
I was more of a lurker than a contributor on Reddit, but I’ll fight for the Fediverse because I believe in it and I don’t want to see it corrupted. I hope others like me will too.
Mostly agree, but the “incentive” focus is a misnomer. Humans don’t just sit around and stare at walls when they’re not “incentivized”. Incentives in sociopolitics is just a rebranding of coercion, getting people to do things they don’t want to do. People are incentivized/coerced to work at McDonald’s because otherwise they’ll live on the streets, the housing scalpers will make sure of it.
FOSS exists and isn’t at risk of dying. Yeah, it’s ideal if the people working on FOSS things don’t have to also work a soul crushing day job, and yeah maybe when their soul is crushed they’ll lose interest in the things they enjoy doing, but we shouldn’t frame that as them getting jaded towards FOSS projects. It’s actually just depression, and it impacts other hobbies too.
All that being said, I’m all for donations to people who do FOSS work so they can escape and do the things they love, it means better FOSS products and happier developers.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Just to clarify, FOSS (Free and Open-Source Software) promotes collaboration, transparency, and community-driven development. For those who may not be familiar with the abbreviation, it’s all about empowering users to use, modify, and distribute software freely. Supporting FOSS developers sustains ongoing development. Let’s appreciate the value of FOSS in fostering an open and accessible software ecosystem.