Seanford is a user on social.nasqueron.org. 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.
Seanford @deadsuperhero

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.

medium.com/we-distribute/faces

@cwebber Derp, I forgot Chris changed their middle name. I've updated this; dunno how long it'll take for the OpenGraph change to populate. 😓

@deadsuperhero @cwebber very interesting! but the irony of posting federated social networking news on medium is just killing me here

@technomancy @cwebber Your complaint is well-documented.

I am investigating an alternative solution, but it has to be something that federates using ActivityPub, so...it could be a while.

I kind of want it to be a platform that I build myself, which is part of why this is a slow process. 😛

@deadsuperhero @cwebber hm I am sympathetic to this, but isn't a non-medium alternative better than medium regardless of whether it's federated with ActivityPub?

@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.

@deadsuperhero @technomancy @cwebber thank you for the interview, it's great !

Regarding federated blogging, you may be interested in Plume, which was catered by @Bat

github.com/Plume-org/Plume

@eliotberriot Yeah, I've seen Plume, and I think @Bat is doing a great job. I just have a lot of my own ideas about what I want, and there are a lot of deep concepts that might not fit into what Bat is trying to do.

@deadsuperhero @technomancy @cwebber oooh, finally, I've been talking about a federated blogging and commenting platform for years. But of course too lazy to implement it myself. ;)

@rysiek @deadsuperhero @cwebber I don't really care that much about comments being integrated, so just having Atom gets 90% of the goodness from my perspective, but ... different strokes for different folks?

@technomancy Absolutely; it's just an integration I've seen between a few different platforms (, ) that I think is actually pretty brilliant in how seamless it can be.

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.

@deadsuperhero

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.

@technomancy

@technomancy @deadsuperhero
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.

@deadsuperhero

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.

@technomancy

@technomancy @deadsuperhero
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.

@deadsuperhero @technomancy
Notes for a decentralized web platform:

* 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.

@technomancy @deadsuperhero
* The allowing sites will reply with a permission to upload

* 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?

* Ideas?

@deadsuperhero @technomancy
So, how about having user folders like

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: github.com/timmc/cavern/blob/m -- working name "cavern".

@rysiek @deadsuperhero @technomancy @cwebber Like, obviously you could designate a subset of your posts to be totally public, and have a nice static blog made from them, but there would be non-public posts as well...

@varx @rysiek @deadsuperhero @technomancy There's nothing about ActivityPub that says posts should be public by default. That's an implementation UI/UX decision. And yes, whether it's a good idea to do that is debatable, and dependent on what kind of community structure you're trying to build.