User avatar
Snoopy @snoopy@peculiar.florist
9mo
connectedplaces.online/reports/fediverse-report-148-on-protocol-governance/

On the complexities of protocol governance.
There are only two organisations that are active in the fediverse that are a paid member of the W3C: Meta and the Social Web Foundation.
With the Social Web Foundation also receiving funding from Meta, the company that built Threads now has more institutional standing in ActivityPub governance than any of the organisations actually building open fediverse software.
Mastodon gGmbH, Framasoft, and others are not W3C members and cannot participate in the Working Group unless they are invited.
⭐8
3
16
0
8
User avatar
lil5 @lil5@social.linux.pizza
9mo
@snoopy

Give me a JSON rest api and I’m happy, sadly activitypub decided to be a special snowflake. My only hope is to use libraries others have built.

I’m happy fedi exists, but the committee and spec builders imo are mad to have decided to reinvent the wheel.
0
0
0
0
User avatar
Macer @macer@his.macer.life
9mo
@snoopy i'm trying to understand what i'm reading there. i'm thinking:

1. take code that someone else worked on forever.

2. make a governing body.

3. leave out the ones who made it so we can take it over.

i'm guessing the next steps are

4. enshitify it.

5. integrate it into our apps.

6. make a lot of people use it.

7. dump it.

8. replace it with our ecosystem's closed source alternative.

9. profit.

tested and true
1
0
0
0
User avatar
julian @julian@activitypub.space
9mo
I don't think that's the intention here. @evan laid out the reasoning behind it here in this thread, which I recommend reading 🙂


activitypub.space/post/https://cosocial.ca/users/evan/statuses/115906457065859792


It may answer your questions or alleviate your concerns.
⭐1
0
0
0
1
User avatar
klu9 on ohai @klu9@ohai.social
9mo
@snoopy

TIL I had no idea who actually controlled . Concerning to hear that developers don't really have a hand in it.
0
0
0
0