Let's take another tea break. (And another bathroom break. This teacup is massive.) We're getting close to done, I promise. Just two sections left, they're both much shorter.
Then I can finally brave reading my notifications.
Maybe.
== TEA BREAK THE THIRD: BEVERAGE TRIFORCE ==
Hello, I am back again. Did you miss me? I still am not reading notifications.
Help I started writing this summary at 11am and it is now 6pm here I have wasted a whole day of work
But I have tea, and I also flossed my teeth, and it is time to resume this thread. If you are here, you know why.
And perhaps this is all my massive Cassandra complex speaking. I won't deny that I have one, for better or worse
Still, despite all I have said about both Bluesky and the fediverse technically, it is because I want a hopeful direction for all of us. Secure collaboration. More important than ever.
Let's take another tea break. (And another bathroom break. This teacup is massive.) We're getting close to done, I promise. Just two sections left, they're both much shorter.
Then I can finally brave reading my notifications.
Maybe.
== TEA BREAK THE THIRD: BEVERAGE TRIFORCE ==
The vision laid out for the fediverse, both independently in my writings and even in Jay Graber and I's joint proposal... well, it's a big lift.
@spritely@social.coop would like to see if we can retrofit our version onto ActivityPub. Time will tell if that's a separate thing.
And perhaps this is all my massive Cassandra complex speaking. I won't deny that I have one, for better or worse
Still, despite all I have said about both Bluesky and the fediverse technically, it is because I want a hopeful direction for all of us. Secure collaboration. More important than ever.
So too does the social structure flow from the tech. It does on Bluesky, and it does on the fediverse.
I won't elaborate further on this, I actually would like you to pause and think about it. In which ways are tech and social systems bidirectional, here and otherwise? It's important.
The vision laid out for the fediverse, both independently in my writings and even in Jay Graber and I's joint proposal... well, it's a big lift.
@spritely@social.coop would like to see if we can retrofit our version onto ActivityPub. Time will tell if that's a separate thing.
Remember when I said that IMO @jay.bsky.team is the right person to lead Bluesky and that I am sympathetic with many design decisions of Bluesky (even if critical of them for being non-decentralized)?
Bluesky is building what they can for a scale big objective. The tech flows from goals.
So too does the social structure flow from the tech. It does on Bluesky, and it does on the fediverse.
I won't elaborate further on this, I actually would like you to pause and think about it. In which ways are tech and social systems bidirectional, here and otherwise? It's important.
It's for that reason that @spritely@social.coop, while aiming for a socially collaborative revolution, is first focusing on a technical revolution.
It's too hard to build massively, securely collaborative tools right now. With Spritely's tools, p2p ocap secure tech is the default output.
Remember when I said that IMO @jay.bsky.team is the right person to lead Bluesky and that I am sympathetic with many design decisions of Bluesky (even if critical of them for being non-decentralized)?
Bluesky is building what they can for a scale big objective. The tech flows from goals.
Conway's Law says that a technical architecture reflects the social structure under which it was built. But the reverse is also true. The social structures we can have are made possible by the affordances of the tools we have available.
"Tech problems/social problems": false dichotomy.
It's for that reason that @spritely@social.coop, while aiming for a socially collaborative revolution, is first focusing on a technical revolution.
It's too hard to build massively, securely collaborative tools right now. With Spritely's tools, p2p ocap secure tech is the default output.
When I laid out the ideas of OCapPub to various fediverse developers, the response was "this sounds cool but I have no idea how to retrofit a Rails/Django app for this kind of actor-oriented design".
And they were right.
Remember when I said Conway's Law flows in both directions?
Conway's Law says that a technical architecture reflects the social structure under which it was built. But the reverse is also true. The social structures we can have are made possible by the affordances of the tools we have available.
"Tech problems/social problems": false dichotomy.
The fediverse and Bluesky, at great effort, could learn a lot from each other in the immediate term.
In the longer term, neither is implementing the ocap vision I think is critical for the big vision, and in a way, I think maybe neither can be easily rearchitected to achieve it. Well, not yet.
When I laid out the ideas of OCapPub to various fediverse developers, the response was "this sounds cool but I have no idea how to retrofit a Rails/Django app for this kind of actor-oriented design".
And they were right.
Remember when I said Conway's Law flows in both directions?
To the end of the fediverse, perhaps I sound bitter, "they didn't adopt ActivityPub the way I saw it!"
The truth is that Mastodon didn't, but Mastodon also saved ActivityPub. It then painted a vision of the future that wasn't, at least, what Jessica Tallon and I expected of it. But it saved AP.
The fediverse and Bluesky, at great effort, could learn a lot from each other in the immediate term.
In the longer term, neither is implementing the ocap vision I think is critical for the big vision, and in a way, I think maybe neither can be easily rearchitected to achieve it. Well, not yet.
Christine Lemmer-Webber