Eugen is a user on mastodon.social. You can follow them or interact with them if you have an account anywhere in the fediverse. If you don't, you can sign up here.
Eugen @Gargron

I'm very glad that @Chocobozzz is working on PeerTube, a federated video hosting platform. I think there is a lot of, if I may put it, thirst, for a photo sharing platform too. With those superficial differences between how Mastodon works and how Instagram works.

And I mean, you could just fork Mastodon and modify the UI. Or you could build on top of ActivityPub from scratch, like PeerTube does. The possibilities are fascinating. All within one network.

· Web · 97 · 119

@Gargron @Chocobozzz I forgot what it was like to see people working on popular network connected software talking about interoperability instead of profit and moats.

@Riley @Gargron @Chocobozzz someone recently posted a screenshot of a Mastodon fork modded for photo sharing. I couldn't find it if you asked, but it looked _great_.

Or you could use hubzilla and have photos and videos with DAV access and events and webpages and wikis and decentralised permissions/privacy attached to all the above and have nomadic identity and communicate with folks on activitypub and diaspora and ostatus to boot.

And if @chocobuzz would just provide a magnet link we wouldn't need to execute foreign javascript across domains (presenting a huge security risk) but could just fetch peertube videos and photos direct from webtorrents and embed them as native objects.

#justsayin

@mike A magnet link is provided, looks like you didn't really look into it. And if you'd listen to people you would realize that a platform that can do everything is not what people are looking for... Mastodon can also host pictures and videos, but the feeling is different to Instagram due to the *lack* of constraints

Thanks for that. There was no such link when I did look into this a few months back.

The reason we integrate all this stuff is because it's the only way you can have a consistent approach to decentralised privacy. Otherwise you have different ways of sharing your photos and videos (etc.) privately and none of them work together and it all breaks if you move servers.

We actually do listen to people, just different people than you listen to. That's not a bad thing - there's room for everybody.

@mike @Gargron Hubzilla is confusing, though. Not the model -- the UI. It's atrocious and looks like Facebook from 2009. I like to think I can figure out almost anything, but Hubzilla gives me a headache with how many features it has and how I'll probably use none of them.

and mastodon looks like a geocities gamer site from1995 except for all the japanese kiddie porn. If your software is any good you can change the UI just like you change a shirt. A billion people used facebook in 2009, despite hundreds of pages of privacy settings and thousands of features and 'vendor integrations'. #justsayin

@mike I find Mastodon pretty straightforward, actually - home column, notifications column, federated column. Simple. And I don't know what you mean by "all the japanese kiddie porn". On the other hand, there's only so much you can do to change the fundamental assumptions Hubzilla makes -- for example, none of your federated posts contain any mentions, and you're probably seeing this as "trwnh commented on your post" instead of as a simple reply.

@mike There's also a lot of bloat like calendars and wikis and so on. That's fine, it just means Hubzilla is trying to do a lot more than social, but it makes for a poor experience for people who just want the social bits. Sure, Facebook had *a couple of hundred million users in 2009, but how many of those users left because of all the "thousands of features and vendor integrations"? How useful is the News Feed model with page-spam? There's a reason why Facebook is losing users in the 1st world.

@mike In short: it's much better to have separate, dedicated apps that focus on one thing and do it well, and have them communicate over a common language.

> In short: it's much better to have separate, dedicated apps that focus on one thing and do it well, and have them communicate over a common language.

Ironically, that's basically the model of how Hubzilla works. It is a web platform that provides a common privacy implementation and a rich set of services to applications such as theming and layout. The various modules (wikis, cards, events, whatever) are for the most part optional and each does one thing. Some are serious counterparts to standalone web servers, some are just simple interfaces to do something very specific. How they fare at doing their job "well" is mostly a matter of whether or not developers are invested in that particular module. It isn't unlike Unix itself. There are a bunch of social networking modules serving different protocols and communications with WordPress and RSS/Atom feeds (for instance). There are several different content publishing tools and file managements services. There are other apps - games and mapping services. What they all share is the common privacy framework and layout engine.

It's a different way of providing web services than providing an array of standalone webservers using different languages and completely different user interfaces and trying to manage logins and permissions across all of them. One for file management, one for communications, one for wikis, feed readers, etc. People have tried this. Heck I've tried this. You can't really. Anyway, if it's not for you, nothing I can do about that. But there are solid reasons why it has to be this way and why somebody has to provide this kind of tool.
If all you want is the social bits, and don't give a rat's bum about privacy and who can see your photos/videos/whatever, stick with Mastodon. If however you want the decentralised privacy bits and want to control who can access your web assets without requiring them to have a login account on your server, there is only one game in town.

@trwnh
thx for feedback. I've heard that argument multible times by different people, but I'm still not shure where it comes from

Did you find it confusing to use hubzilla 'just' as a 'normal' social network, or did you found all the other functions confusing?
Was the landingpage of the hubzilla project overwhelming with all the function it presents?

Cause the 'standart' social media profil takes like just ~2 clicks to set it up
@mike @Gargron

@paulfree14 @mike @Gargron The landing page for the Hubzilla project is actually much nicer than the actual Hubzilla UI. But for the most part, the "confusing" thing is having so much stuff in one application. It's just overwhelming. I think the demo shows off the worst of the "Facebooky" aspects-- e.g. "thisperson changed their profile picture", "thatperson commented on your event". It actively gets in the way of communication.

@paulfree14 @mike Well I've had accounts on hub.libranet.de and joindiaspora.org and google+ for years -- safe to say i'm done with facebook-style social media. a minimum viable product should be simple and work its way up, not throw in the kitchen sink before it even looks clean.

@trwnh @Gargron @mike The fediverse systems based on OStatus/AP tend to be quite simple and just do one microblog-like thing. This lack of complexity is I think why those systems have more users than Diaspora/Friendica/Hubzilla. It's easy to grok as "the open source Twitter", or whatever, and doesn't take much to learn (although last year proved challenging for technology journalists). If clueless tech journos struggle with the very basic concepts of fediverse systems then they will be totally blown out of the water and into the stratosphere by Hubzilla. I also expect that over time Mastodon will be tempted to add more bloaty features.

The complexity of Hubzilla isn't necessarily bad, but it's more difficult to get folks to use things where there is more of an upfront learning requirement. Hubzilla solves a lot of the problems which the fediverse still struggles with, and I'd rather see fediverse systems standardize on Zot than on AP.

@bob @mike Yeah, exactly.
* "This is a server for statuses."
* "This is a server for videos."
* "This is a server for content management."
These kinds of statements are easy to understand.
"This is a permission system that also lets you do everything" is inherently much more complex.

I sure hope Mastodon keeps it simple, because Twitter is currently languishing in feature-creep and thinks it's a media curator instead of a conversational platform.

@mike @bob I'm not personally invested in zot as a protocol, nor in activitypub, but I think AP is a bit easier to understand and more widely applicable. For example: if a service is intended to be public or almost always public, then what benefit does a rich permission system add? In the case of PeerTube, for example, videos are served via WebTorrent, which benefits from having more peers much more than it does from privacy.

@bob @mike On the other hand, I admire the fact that zot has managed to achieve DNS independence and implement nomadic identity. It's more graceful than a simple export/import, but at the same time, export/import covers most simple use cases sufficiently. Ultimately, it's about simplicity and convenience.

@trwnh @mike Even for a public system you might want to have rules such as "I want user X to be able to read but not comment on this post"

@trwnh they opt for the media curation because that's the best medium for native advertisment.

@rigelk Well, of course. Capital ruins everything.

@Gargron @Chocobozzz I would like to see something like a decentralised soundcloud as well. Look at how many people use youtube just for music

@Shutsumon @Gargron @Chocobozzz I read in an article some time back, that the reason we don't see more SoundCloud clones is because of how litigation happy the music industry is.

It also said that one hurdle is that in order to have have any kind of content ID, you need legal copies of every song to make the system work.

It'll be interesting to see how a federation would approach/deal with these potential challenges.

@ChrisWere
I'd say, fuck them. We can't afford to waste time on bending over backwards for people who don't care about us. Their time has passed. They may close one or two instances on legislation but they won't close down all of us.
Besides, I can't imagine anyone deliberately posting a pirated mainstream song. BitTorrent still exists, if that's your kind of thing.
@Shutsumon @Gargron @Chocobozzz

@drequivalent @Shutsumon @Gargron @Chocobozzz
Rousing words!

Because federated networks can be pretty flexible and scattered it's not impossible that the fediverse can outmanoeuvre the crusty old music industry.

@ChrisWere
Exactly. Why give a shit about rich old assholes who'd rather stick to obsolete distribution models?
@Shutsumon @Gargron @Chocobozzz

@Chocobozzz @Gargron @Shutsumon @ChrisWere
Their laws are inadequate to the situation an immoral, and we are willing, ready and able to ignore it, as already shown by, once again, BitTorrent.

@Shutsumon
Also for federation:
Facebook (@banjofox woking on it)
Instagram (already mentioned)
Livejournal (long-form bloggging and communities)
Reddit (community forums)
Disqus (random site comment sections)
May be even phpBB (buletin boards, although I'm not sure if they are even alive)
@Gargron @Chocobozzz

@drequivalent @banjofox @Gargron @Chocobozzz Oh yes I'd love to see a federated livejournal.dreamwidth type thing!

@drequivalent @Shutsumon hm what would be the difference between federated!disqus and sites just hosting their own comments sections again? Not against the idea, just cant envision how it’d work :)

The others would all be great tho

@Satsuma @Shutsumon The difference would be, we will be able to post comments and discuss the post from any other Fediware. The same way we already can discuss the video on Peertube from right here.

@Gargron @Chocobozzz

there is SO much thirst for photo sharing. So. Much.

@Gargron

Just forwarding to @Reka who should be interested :)

@Chocobozzz