Just published an interview with @cwebber , one of my very favorite people in this space. We have had the honor of eating sushi and burritos together at various times.
@technomancy Yes, it's just kind of an obsession that the content itself has to syndicate with federated systems. Sort of makes the concept self-demonstrating, and allows people to subscribe to publications from Mastodon and comment from there.
I could throw it on some Wordpress and try to modify it enough after the fact, but tbh I'd rather just finish building my own thing.
Anyway, like I said: I am trying to find a solution to this. Right now it's more important for me to just get content out there. I have an enormous backlog of stuff, though, so I might try to shift priorities in the short term.
I think the ideal web publication platform would be like Mastodon but with static web content: you publish your site and it gets federated to the other servers, almost like a cache. Site owners reserve the right not to publish certain material (re:pedo and snuff), but in general most content passes and is replicated across servers.
However, large media like videos should be shared through other platforms like Mediagoblin in order to preserve disk space.
The idea here is not to aim for censorship resistance because of potential clashes with law enforcement orgs (getting a server shut down because of ONE SITE is s bad idea), but simply to achieve decentralization. We don't want to have another TOR or another FreeNet or ZeroNet, there's enough illegal/evil garbage on those that we don't want.
I wonder if IPFS would be useful to have, to also allow (NOT require!) users to share the bandwidth costs.
@rick_777 @technomancy Yeah, Plume has a pretty good approach here where just the basic metadata (description, title, thumbnail) are what gets federated over to microblogging apps. This is in line with how PeerTube does it for the most part.
The way I see it, full articles would be federated between article instances, whereas something shorter would be sent between other types of apps.
IPFS is also a super interesting idea for archiving content.
If we use HTTP plus ActivityPub, it'd just be matter of publishing each file along with its local URL and maybe size, crypto hash, and then the transfer starts via standard https.
Destination site keeps retrying all the missing urls for N times and sends an error message to original site to tell it to send an alert to the owner maybe?
Hmmm... we'd need special tags to generate links for the available mirrors (incl. original) for a site.
And here's the kicker: Blogging platforms could be our ON TOP of this federated "Apache" (hmmm... PonyXpress? There's a name idea) as plugins, so that this becomes the backbone of a new federated web.
Blogs, zines, etc
Federated static web
Of course, this would be focused on (semi?) static content - truly dynamic stuff requiring databases, etc would require other kind of frameworks.
* Servers should have a size limit, per file and per site, to allow for low bandwidth, low budget, text-only servers.
* When copying content, a server must contact is peers to ask for restrictions, or maybe announce a new or updated site, and the restrictions: site and maximum file size, languages, content rating (porn, profanity, guns, etc.) so that peers will allow it deny upload requests.
* The site will then upload a list of files and hashes, and their last modification date.
* Each site will keep a fully updated list of files and properties.
* Each site will then download the files from the other site.
* Upon successful update, each site will repeat the process so the entire network will be updated.
* Bandwidth limits?
http colon // instance / fulluser@instance /yourstuffgoesherehere?
It's almost so simple that it would only require an Apache server plus the sync stuff. Then clients could replace the server name for protocol:// and voila.
Still, this would only work for static sites. The dynamic part would need to use activitypub and stuff, that's the complicated work.
Anyway, just random thoughts.
@rysiek @deadsuperhero @technomancy @cwebber How would y'all feel about one that by default doesn't even have a public face to it? There's currently nothing out there that's like "decentralized Dreamwidth" where you can share things with just some subset of the world. I think public social media causes a *lot* of problems.
I've been noodling over some ideas here: https://github.com/timmc/cavern/blob/master/doc/ideas.md -- working name "cavern".