Mastodawn

@jeffjarvis @fediversereport Each article like this moves the ball a bit more downfield. I just wish they would stop saying "Mastodon instance" when they should be saying "Fediverse instance." It has a real consequence, because it makes it harder for alternate platforms to gain traction and grow, which puts downward pressure on the healthy competition between them. And that always slows the pace of innovation. And we still need a lot of that.

We’ve been here before with RSS where Google Reader came to dominate.

Needless to say it was in the end a very bad result for RSS as a basis for interop.

@davew @jeffjarvis @fediversereport

Excellent example, Dave. It must still sting. How can we make fedizens understand just how likely that outcome is if we don't pay more attention this time?

we're still trying to get over the mess that google left behind, and mastodon is actually helping, but having title-less feeds (something that google reader abhor'd even though it's legal in RSS).

i don't know what to say about activitypub. i don't think you can change anything about the way "fedizens" view things. i think that it's Mastodon they're using is already baked-in.

@davew @jeffjarvis @fediversereport

Well, you're probably right, but I really hate thinking anything this new is locked into a given path. Especially since the commercial sharks are still swimming around looking for a nice red place to feed, but haven't yet gotten their teeth into it yet. (But not for lack of interest).

you're right about the sharks, and get ready for more frustration -- because when a shark comes along with a more reliable or in some measurable way better version of mastodon, a lot of users are going to jump. even just because they like the comfort of a big trusted brand name, no matter how unwise it is to trust that company.

what to do about it? i'll start another message in reply...

here's my prescription. off on the side, come up with a very simple format/protocol that accomplishes what AP does. not the whole thing, just a nice subset.

then create a simple open source product, easy to deploy, and easy to use, and attractive in some way and hope it gets traction with some users. enough to attract independent developers to try to create their own stake in that fediverse.

in other words start fresh and fix the core problem with AP.

@davew @jeffjarvis @fediversereport

So, replace, not repair. The designer ideologue in me agrees, but the politician in me is grimacing. I'd think Jack and Rabble certainly agree, too, but do you see AP extensions as insufficient to fix, or at least mitigate some of the weaknesses you see in the AP protocol?

you asked my advice, i gave it.

now you're interpreting it and asking me to defend your interpretation. i didn't sign up for that. ;-)

i guess it depends on your goal. my own goal, i love being able to develop without fear of having my work wiped out by some random person in a huge tech company. i've actually accomplished that a couple of times. as i said, i think the train has left the station on AP and Mastodon. ymmv.

@davew @jeffjarvis @fediversereport Wasn't asking you to defend anything. Sorry if it read that way. I'm curious as to your thoughts about what AP needs to improve it, if it can be. Some have told me that, like Masto's reliance on Rails/Sidekiq, the fail-points are already foreseen in terms of the federated events it can handle, affordably. Do you see similar time-bombs in AP itself; a likely showstopper as things keeps scaling-up, and that's why you'd ideally replace it, market permitting?

Dave Winer ☕️

@shoq

i don't even understand the question, i'm wrong guy to ask about that.